The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-05-29
ANOTHER PROVISION
The Codes Contain a Fifteen Puzzle
for Lawyers and officials.
JUSTICE COURT JUDGMENTS
Attorneys Hold Different Views on
the Question: Construc-
ton as Placed on the
Law by the Clerk.
JUSTICE COURT JUDGMENT,

Lawyers and court officials have
lately been greatly puzzled over an
other peculiar code provision and, ac-
cording to the construction placed on
II by some, judgments obtained in JUS
tice courts in civil actions could be
made absolutely worthless. Under a
section of the statute a judgment OBJ
tanned In a justice court can be filed
with the clerk of the district court, II
is claimed, and 1t becomes a lien upon
all the real estate of the judgment debt
or. A number of attorneys have hate
ly filed such judgments and requested
the clerk to issue an execution which
he has refused to do. basing his refusal
on the provision of section 1882 of the
code of civil procedure which reads:
From the time of docketing in the
clerks office execution may be issued
thereon by the clerk to the sheriff of
any county in the state, other than the
county in which the judgment was
rendered, in the same manner and with
like effect as IL issued on a Judgment
of the district court
The clerk commended. and the county
attorney gave an opinion to that eff
feet, that an execution could not be is
sued under that section aus it distinctly
said that IL applied only to ''other than
the county in which the judgment was
rendered" 1t was argued by some of
the attorneys that such a construction
would make valueless a judgment OBJ
tanned in a county where the debtors
property was located. Several attor-
neys, who were members of the late
legislature. tried to convince the clerk
that IL would be all right to issue the
execution and said IL was evident that
a line or two had been dropped out OF
the section of the code quoted. The
clerk, however, had secured legal adj
vice and refused to issue executions on
the justice court judgments. The mat
ter was referred to Judge Mediation.
but he declined to give an opinion I'M
til the matter was properly brought
before him.
Attorney c. NJ. Parr yesterday filed
a judgment In the case of Henry Kipp
against John Zachman, but did not OBJ
tain an execution and he made a search
of the statutes and court decisions and
arrived at the conclusion that the 9TH
er attorneys, including those who had
help to build the codes. have been la
boring under a mistake as to the
meaning and scope of section 1882.
Under a decision OF the California SUI
preme court, recorded in the 10th Cali
fornia, page 145, a construction is
given to a similar statute and holds
that II is not necessary to file a justice
court judgment in the district court
where IL is sought to obtain an execu-
ton against property located In the
county wherein the judgment was en-
tered, and that section 1880 applied
only to cases where, for instance.
where II is desired to secure an execu-
ton against Deer Lodge county prop
erty on an execution obtained in Sill
yer Bow county. In the county where
the action1s brought and tried the jus
tice shall issue the execution. accord
ing to Mr.. PARIS construction of the
statute, and a constable has the same
powers as the sheriff In serving It,