Case Name: TILFORD et al. v. OAKLEY
Court: Superior Court of the Territory of Arkansas
Jurisdiction: Arkansas
Decision Date: 1832
Citations: 23 F. Cas. 1222
Docket Number: 
Parties: TILFORD et al. v. OAKLEY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Cases
Volume: 23
Pages: 1222–1223

Head Matter:
Case No. 14,038a.
TILFORD et al. v. OAKLEY.
[Hempst. 197.]
Superior Court, Territory of Arkansas.
1832.
Equity — Adequate Remedy at Law — Bill to Enforce Money Decree.
A bill m chancery is not the proper remedy to enforce a decree in chancery for the payment of money, the remedy at law being adequate and .complete.
Appeal from Hempstead circuit court

Opinion:
OPINION OF
THE COURT.
This is an appeal from the decree of the circuit court of Hempstead county, pronounced in a cause wherein John Tilford & Co. were complainants, and Allen M. Oakley, defendant dismissing the complainants' bill. The complainants filed their bill to enforce a decree-of the Bath circuit court df the state of Kentucky, decreeing the defendant Oakley to pay a specific sum of money. The only question for the consideration of this court is, whether a bill in chancery is the.appropriate remedy to enforce a decree in chancery for> the • payment of a specific sum of money. ' We think it is not the proper remedy. The complaint had a clear and complete remedy at law, by an action of debt founded on the decree. Thompson t. Jameson, 1 Cranch. [5 U. S.] 282; Post v. Neafie, 3 Caines, 22; Sadler v. Robins, 1 Camp. 253. Decree affirmed.