Case Name: The People of the State of Illinois, ex rel. James A. McDougall, attorney general, v. Ebenezer, Peck, Clerk of the Supreme court
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1843-12
Citations: 4 Scam. 404
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of Illinois, ex rel. James A. McDougall, attorney general, v. Ebenezer, Peck, Clerk of the Supreme court.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 419–420

Head Matter:
The People of the State of Illinois, ex rel. James A. McDougall, attorney general, v. Ebenezer, Peck, Clerk of the Supreme court.
Application for a Writ of Mandamus.
i. Laches — not imputed to pttblic representative. It is not.necessary to revive a judgment in favor of the auditor of public accounts, by scire facias, before execution can issue thereon, notwithstanding more than a year and a day has intervened subsequently to the rendition of the judgment. The artditor is the representative of the people, and the law does not impute laches to them.
This was an application by the attorney general, for a writ of mandamus against the clerk of the supreme court, to compel him to issue an execution upon a judgment which had been rendered in favor of the auditor, more than a year and a day before the application was made for the execution ; and no execution had ever issued upon the judgment. The clerk submitted the question to the court for its direction, being doubtful of his duty in the premises.
J. A. McDougall, attorney general:
The relator insists that where judgment is rendered in favor of the state, .and execution is not issued within the year and a day, it is not necessary to revive the judgment by scire facias-, that the maxim, “nullum tem-pus occurrit regnif applies to states, as it does to the crown at common law, and refers to 6 Bac. Abr. 107, title Sei. fa.; 2 Salk. 603; Minnor’s Executors v. The Commonwealth, 4 Hen. & Munf. 55, 67, where the rule that scire facias is not necessary on the part of the King or Commonwealth, is expressly held in Kemp v. The Commonwealth. In 1 Hen. & Munf. 85; Stoughton et al. v. Baker et al. 4 Mass. 528 ; Madison County v. Bartlett, 1 Scam. 70 ; and The State Bank v. Brown, 1 Scam. Í07; the general applicability of the above maxim to states and municipal corporations is fully recognised.

Opinion:
Per Curiam, Lockwood, Justice:
It is not necessary to take out a scire facias on a judgment in favor of the [* 405] auditor, notwithstanding more than a year and a day has intervened since the rendition of the judgment. The auditor is the representative of the people, and the law does not impute laches to them.
The application is allowed.
Mandamus awarded.