Case Name: Esther Johnson against Parmely
Court: New York Supreme Court of Judicature
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1820-01
Citations: 17 Johns. 271
Docket Number: 
Parties: *Esther Johnson against Parmely.
Judges: 
Reporter: Johnson's Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 216–216

Head Matter:
*Esther Johnson against Parmely.
Where the plaintiff, being íe/a”report of referees in her and a judgment was afterwards entered up on the report; and an execution Tl'cte"facias Deing- issued, to make the bus-band a party to the judgment, was set-aside for irregularity.
THIS cause having been referred, the referees made a report in favor of the plaintiff, in October, 1818. On the 25th of October, after the report was made, the plaintiff intermarried with William Tibbits. The plaintiff’s attorney proceeded, and entered up judgment on the report, the 4th of December, and issued an execution against the defendant.
Wendell, for the defendant,
now moved to set aside the judgment and execution, and all proceedings thereon, for irregularity. J
Huntington, contra,
cited Alexander y. Fink, (1‘2 Johns. Rep. 218.) in which the court decided, that the marriage of a feme sole plaintiff, after verdict, or after a report of referees, which was the same as a verdict, could not be pleaded in abatement.

Opinion:
Per Curiara.
It is a settled principle, that wherever there is a change of parties, by marriage, bankruptcy, or death, whereby other persons become interested in the execution of the judgment, a scire facias is necessary so as to make such new person a party to the judgment. (Tidd's Practice, 1021.) Here the husband will be benefited by the execution of the judgment, and has, by the marriage, acquired an interest in it The execution must be set aside for irregularity, with costs.
Rule accordingly.