Case Name: Robert Cowden v. Joseph Hurford and others
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1829-12
Citations: 4 Ohio 342
Docket Number: 
Parties: Eobert Cowden v. Joseph Hureord and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Cases decided in the supreme court of ohio : upon the circuit at the special sessions in Columbus
Volume: 4
Pages: 342–343

Head Matter:
Eobert Cowden v. Joseph Hureord and others.
Execution can not issue on a general judgment of restitution, without first issuing a sci. fa.
Hureord and others recovered a judgment against Cowden in the court of common pleas of Jefferson county. Upon this judgment Cowden sued out a writ of error, and this court reversed the-judgment, and thereupon rendered a judgment for costs, upon the writ of error, and for a restitution in1 the usual form, with a mandate to the court of common pleas to carry the same into execution. When this mandate came down, Cowden moved the court of common pleas to award a writ of restitution, which motion was overruled. He then applied to this court for a peremptory mandamus to the court below, or to award a writ oí restitution returnable in this court. This application was reserved for ^decision- here by the Supreme Court. The record of the judgment of reversal was not produced, nor did it appear that, this court, in the judgment of reversal, had awarded the restitution of any certain sum of money; but upon the application .to the court of common pleas for a writ of restitution, Cowden exhibited evidence of certain payments made upon the judgment reversed».
Tappan,
in support of the application, cited 2 Salk. 588; 5 Com. Dig. 725.
There was no argument on the other side.

Opinion:
By the Court :
A judgment of restitution is strictly a judgment which the court have inherent power to execute. 12 Serg, & Rawle, 292. And the court, in the case cited, hold that where this judgment of restitution is rendered, assumpsit will not lie for the money.
But the court are now called upon to point out the manner of executing this judgment. If the judgment of reversal contain-evidence of the precise thing to be restored, the writ of restitution may be awarded. Cro. Car. 699. But where the matter to be restored is not specified in the judgment, but depends upon evidence dehors the record, it is inconsistent with the policy of the law to permit execution without an opportunity given to the other-party to make his defense.
The proper remedy in such ease is the writ of scire facias. Saund. 101, y; 2 Salk. 583.
Por the form of a scire facias guare restitutionem non, see Bill. Ent. 641, 650; and for the form of a restitution, see Tidd's Prao. Porms, 541, 542.