#### SALMON SHERMAN Respondent, vs. DELOS BRETT, Impleaded with others.

APPEAL PROM ROCK CIRCUIT COURT.

Where separate judgments are rendered against several persons liable for the same cause of action, they are each and all liable, up to the point of satisfaction, and to reasonable costs in the prosecution of appropriate remedies. '

But in such case there can be but one satisfaction.

The whole case is set out in the following affidavit, together with the order of the court made thereon.

*“*Delos Brett, being first duly sworn, deposeth and says that he resides in the city of Janesville, in the county of Rock and State of Wisconsin, and is one of the defendants in the above entitled action. That on or about the fourth day of February, A. D. 1858, the said Salmon Sherman, the plaintiff in this action, at the county of Walworth aforesaid, within the first judicial circuit of the State of Wisconsin, obtained separate judgments in said action in his favor, and against this deponent and the said Edward Winne, Smith and Harrington, defendants therein, each for the sum of or about two hundred and thirty-six dollars, as this deponent has been informed and verily believes to be true, and that both said judgments so obtained as aforesaid, were for the same cause of action; and that afterwards, on the day and year last aforesaid, said judgments were duly docketed in the office of the clerk of said court. That afterwards, on or about the first day of July, A. D. 1858, an execution was duly issued on one of the said judgments so obtained as aforesaid against the defendant, Edward Winne, to the sheriff of the county *140of Walworth, aforesaid, with direction to the said sheriff endorsed on said execution, to collect the full amount of such judgment, and specifying the amount thereof, together with interest, costs, and fees, and per cent, of said sheriff for collecting the same, as this deponent has been informed by the sheriff of said Walworth county, and verily believes to be true. That afterwards, on or about the first day of July, A. D. 1858, the sheriff of said Walworth county, made a levy of said execution, then being in his hands during the lifetime of said execution, on personal property then being in the said county of Walworth, of the said Edward Winne, one of the defendants named in said execution, sufficient to satisfy the said judgment, said personal property being of the value of the sum of about five thousand dollars, as this deponent has also been informed by the said sheriff of said Walworth county, and verily believes to be true. That after the making the levy of said execution as aforesaid, the said sheriff iff said Walworth county collected and received on said execution the sum of sixty dollars as this deponent has been informed by said sheriff and verily belives to be true. That after the levy of said execution as aforesaid, H. F. Smith, the attorney for the plaintiff in .this action, instructed and directed the said sheriff to stop all proceedings on said execution so issued, and then being in the hands of said sheriff, till further directed by him, said Smith, as this deponent has been informed by the said sheriff of Walworth county aforesaid, and verily believes to be true. And this deponent further says that on or about the nineteenth day of July, A. D. 1858, the plaintiff in this action caused a transcript of said judgment obtained as aforesaid in this action, in his favor and against this deponent, and docketed as aforesaid, to be filed and docketed in the county of Rock with the clerk of this court as appears of record to which file, docket and record thereof this deponent refers. That afterwards, on or about the first day of August, *141A. D. 1858, the plaintiff in said action caused an execution to be issued on the said judgment so obtained in this action against this deponent, and docketed as aforesaid to the sheriff of the county of Rock aforesaid, which said execution so issued on said judgment to the sheriff of the county of Rock aforesaid was returned on or about the 20th day of November, A. D. 1858, bv the sheriff of the county of Rock unsatisfied. That afterwards, on or about the 9th of December, A. D. 185S, an alias execution was issued on said judgment so obtained in this action against this deponent to the sheriff of Rock county, with directions to said sheriff endorsed on said *alias*execution to collect the sum of two hundred and thirteen dollars and seventy-two cents, with interest thereon from the fourteenth day of August, A. D. 1858, also fifty cents clerk’s fees for transcript and docketing judgment, besides sheriff’s fees and percentage. That on the 13th day of December, A. D. 1858, by virtue of said execution said sheriff of the county of Rock aforesaid levied upon thirty chests of tea, black and green, estimated at fifteen hundred pounds, and one patent safe, all belonging to this deponent, a copy of which said alias execution, with a copy of said directions, and levy thereon endorsed, is hereto annexed, marked ‘ Exhibit A.’ And further this deponent saith not.”

Subscribed and sworn, &c.

Whereupon the court made the following order:

“ On reading the foregoing affidavit of Delos Brett, one of the defendants in the above entitled action, and on motion of Eldredge, Pease & Ruger, attorneys for said Brett, in open court now being held at the court house in the city of Janes-ville, in the county of Rock and State of Wisconsin, it is ordered that the plaintiff in this action show cause before this court at the court house in the city of Janesville, in the county of Rock aforesaid, on the 24th day of December inst., at *142ten o’clock in the forenoon of that day, why the property of the said Delos Brett, defendant in this action, levied upon by the sheriff of the county of Rock, by virtue of the *alias*execution mentioned and set forth in said affidavit, should not be released therefrom, and said execution returned endorsed satisfied, and the said judgment in said action, as against the said Delos Brett, be discharged of record.”

On the 24th December, 1858, after hearing the arguments of counsel, the court discharged the said rule for want of jurisdiction; from which order an appeal is taken.

An elaborate argument was made by counsel upon the question of jurisdiction raised by the appeal, but as that question was not considered or determined by the court, it would hardly be warranted to insert the same here,

*B. B. Eldridge*for the appellant.

*H. F. Smith*for the respondent.

*By the Court,*

Smith, J.

This is an’ appeal from an order of the circuit court of Rock county. It presents the not un-sual case of a separate judgment against several persons liable in the same cause of action. The rule of law in such cases is so clear that authorities need not be quoted for its exemplification. There can be but one satisfaction, but all of the judgment debtors are liable up to the point of satisfaction, and to reasonable costs in the prosecution of appropriate remedies.

We do not feel disposed, at this time to enter into a discussion of the jurisdictional question raised on this appeal; but we have no doubt that the court below did right in discharging the rule, even though he may have erred on the question of jurisdiction.

Order affirmed with costs.