Case Name: Darlington against Speakman
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1844-12
Citations: 9 Watts & Serg. 182
Docket Number: 
Parties: Darlington against Speakman.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Watts & Sergeant)
Volume: 9
Pages: 182–183

Head Matter:
Darlington against Speakman.
It is not regular to issue an execution on a judgment after the death of the plaintiff, in the name of his executor, without previously suggesting the death of the plaintiff, and substituting the executor upon the record. Where it was done, however, and the money levied, this court, on writ of error, remitted the record, with direction to suggest the death and substitute the name of the executor upon the record nunc pro tunc.
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Delaware county.
On the 12th July 1842, judgment was entered in the Common Pleas of Delaware county in favour of William Speakman, Sen., against William Speakman, Jun., on a bond and warrant of attorney given by the latter to the former for a debt of $3000. After the death of William Speakman, Sen., to wit, on the 2d June 1843, an execution was issued on said judgment in the name of the executors of William Speakman, Sen., upon the following praecipe, filed in the prothonotary’s office: —
“Clement Darlington and Azariah Thomas, executors of William Speakman, Sen., deceased, v. William Speakman, Jun.
CSee judgment entered in favourofWilliam Speak- < man, Sen., July 12,1842. I Issue fieri facias. Debt $3000, &c.”
Under this execution the personal property of the defendant was levied on and sold, and the money paid over to the plaintiffs. On the 12th of September 1843, upon application of the defendant, the court granted a rule to show cause why the execution should not be set aside, on the ground that there was no suggestion of the death of William Speakman, Sen., and substitution of his executors upon the record, prior to issuing the execution. On the 27th of February 1844, the Court of Common Pleas made the rule absolute, and set aside the execution. The plaintiffs took a writ of error.
W. Darlington, for the plaintiffs in error,
argued that the prae-cipe for the execution was a substantial suggestion of death and substitution of the executors, and was sufficient to connect the execution with the judgment.
E. Darlington and Perkins, contra.
The reporters are indebted to William Darlington, Esq., for the report of this case.

Opinion:
This Court ordered the record to be remitted to the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware county, with directions to permit the plaintiffs to suggest the death of William Speakman, Sen., and substitute the names of Clement Darlington and Azariah Thomas, his executors, as parties to the judgment, nunc pro tunc; and to reinstate the execution.