Case Name: J. Ferris, E. Ferris, J. Haviland and S. Pearsall, Administrators of E. Haviland vs. Francis Child and Daniel Farrand
Court: Vermont Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Vermont
Decision Date: 1814
Citations: 1 D. Chip. 335
Docket Number: 
Parties: J. Ferris, E. Ferris, J. Haviland and S. Pearsall, Administrators of E. Haviland vs. Francis Child and Daniel Farrand.
Judges: 
Reporter: Chipman, D.
Volume: 1
Pages: 336–337

Head Matter:
J. Ferris, E. Ferris, J. Haviland and S. Pearsall, Administrators of E. Haviland vs. Francis Child and Daniel Farrand.
In Chancery.
A I3~11 ~uppkrnontary to a Bill in C~jancery, a Bill of Revivor, Bill of Review, 0" Bill to carry into effect a fo~ mer decree, must be brought in the same Ccnnty where the original suit was brought, and the proceedings are of r ord.
Chittenden,
1814.
rIlaIS ~as a bill Su~)pIemefltary, to revive, amend and carry into effect a former decr~e of this Court, against Francis Child, made at St. Albans in the County of Franklin, December term, 1809, on a bill brought by J. and E. Ferris against Francis Child and 3. Havi.~ land, to be quieted and coufirmed in their title to certain lots of lane! in Coichester in the County of Chittenden, which the plaintiffs had, before that time, purchased of Francis Child, and to have a deed from the said Francis Child to James Haviland set aside, as fraudulent.
The decree was against Francis Child only, that he should con~ vey by good authentic deed to the plaintiffs, and procure to them a release of the premises from J. Haviland, by a day now long passed. Francis Child had not performed the decree, but had procured a deed of the premIses from 5. Haviland to Daniel Farrand, no~,r made a defendant, in trust for him the said Francis Child. The plaintiffs had conveyed part of the premises to Ebe~ezer Haviland, since deceased, and his administrators were joined with the plaintiffs in this bill. The defendants had answered, and the cause was heard at the last term of the Court in this County, and continued for consideration.

Opinion:
By the Court.
A bill supplementary, a bill of revivor, review, or for varying or carrying into effect a former decree, must be bro't in the same County where the original suit was entered and the proceedings are of record. The terms of the Supreme Court and Court of Chancery are holden for each County severally, and the records in each kept by a separate Clerk, and the records and proceedings of the Court, in any County, are before the Court in that County only. The proceedings in causes of this nature must be on record before the Court, which cannot be in another County. They may be compared to proceedings on a scire facias, to revive a judgment, or to have execution, which, it has always been holden, must, if before the Supreme Court, be brought in the same County where the original judgment is of record. To adopt a different practice would occasion great difficulty and inconvenience. With us, the records cannot be removed — a transcript only can be had. It frequently becomes necessary to examine the original files and. records.
There can be no justifiable reason for permitting a practice so inconvenient and unprecedented.
The bill musttherefore be dismissed, but without prejudice.