Case Name: Exparte John Black
Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1830-12
Citations: 2 Bail. 8
Docket Number: 
Parties: Exparte John Black.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 18
Pages: 8–9

Head Matter:
Exparte John Black.
The Sheriff is bound, in executing a writ of habere facias possessionem, to put the plaintiff into complete possession, and to dispossess all other persons, whether parties to the record or not
Appeal from an order of Mr. Justice Richardson, made at Columbia, Fall Term, 1830.
This was a rule upon the sheriff, to shew cause why an attachment should not issue against -him for not executing a writ of habere facias possessionem,.
To this the sheriff made return: “ That according to the exigency of the writ, he had dispossessed the defendant Jane Steel, of the premises in controversy, and pntthe plaintiff, John Black, into possession of them. But that at that time there was said to be a third person, not a party to the record, in possession, claiming in his own right: and with this person, the sheriff did not consider himself legally authorized to interfere.”
His Honour discharged the rule, and this was a motion to reverse his decision.
Hammond, for the motion.
Preston, contra.

Opinion:
Johnson J.
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The exigency of the writ of habere facias possessionem, requires that the sheriff should put the plaintiff in possession of the premises, as well as that he should turn out the defendant, and this can only be done' by turning out all who are in possession. The only objection to this course, is, that it might operate upon third persons who were in possession, claiming in their own right, and who were not parties, and who might not have notice of the pendency of the suit. The common law provides an ample remedy for this evil. If the tenant in possession make default or neglect to give the landlord notice of the action, ón a proper case made, the Court will stay execution until his right is tried, 3 Bl. Com. 203-5, thus furnishing a security against ,a collusion between the plaintiff and defendant, to prejudice the rightful owner, and against the combination between the defendant and others pretending title, to the injury of the plaintiff.
The order of the Circuit Court is therefore reversed, and it is ordered that the rule against the sheriff be made absolute, unless he execute the said writ within one month after notice of this opinion.
Motion, granted.