Case Name: Myers against Kelsey
Court: New York Supreme Court of Judicature
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1821-08
Citations: 19 Johns. 197
Docket Number: 
Parties: Myers against Kelsey.
Judges: 
Reporter: Johnson's Reports
Volume: 19
Pages: 197–198

Head Matter:
Myers against Kelsey.
house frig the°df! ajudgmcn"^ ga¡nsthím,°and th* purchaser; and afterwards, seized and sold the same house and lot, on anoissued on a pripfí^the'deaXertised the ^™comt refus«d to stay proceedings, on the. application of the purchaser under the execution first issued, hut left him medy by action!
BY Virtue of a fieri facias issued on a judgment entered up by the President and Directors of the Manhattan Company against K., the defendant, on the 20th October, 1817, the sheriff of the county of Dutchess advertised and sold a house and lot belonging to the defendant, in Poughkeepsie, at public auction, on the 25th of November, 1819. Peter 1 Flaglee became the purchaser thereof, at such sale : and a 1 . deed was executed by the sheriff to him, in the usual form, A fieri facias in debt on scire facias against the defendant, nt the suit of M., the plaintiff, was delivered to the sheriff of Dutchess, in May last, returnable on the first day of this term, by which the sheriff was directed, in case sufficient goods and chattels of the defendant could not he found in ... his bailiwick, to cause the debt, &c. to be made of the lands . and tenements whereof the defendant was seised on the - . - 28th or November, 1809, or at any time alternaras, &c. By virtue of the last mentioned execution, the sheriff again levied on the same house and lot before sold by him t® p P' under the former execution, and advertised the same for sale. F., in his affidavit, alleged that no scire facias to revive the last mentioned judgment was issued, until the 23d day of October, 1820, and that the judgment on such scire facias was not perfected until the last May term.
Oakley, in behalf of P. F.,
the purchaser under the first mentioned execution, now moved that all further proceed* ings under the last mentioned execution be stayed.
J. Tallmadge, contra.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We do not think proper to decide on the rights of these parties, in this summary way; but F., the purchaser under the execution in favour of the Manhattan Company, must be left to his remedy by action.
Motion denied.