Case Name: Elizabeth Woodcock versus Azariah Walker
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1817-10
Citations: 13 Tyng 386
Docket Number: 
Parties: Elizabeth Woodcock versus Azariah Walker.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 330–330

Head Matter:
Elizabeth Woodcock versus Azariah Walker.
Sdre fados does not lie upon an order of the Common Pleas, that the reputed father of an illegitimate child shall pay a weekly sum towards the maintenance of such child; and that he shall give a bond therefor, and to indemnify the town.
This was a writ of scire facias, returnable to the Circuit Court of Common Pleas for this county, in which the said Elizabeth recites that she preferred her complaint to the said court, at a former term thereof, upon which such proceedings were there had ; that the said Azariah was adjudged the reputed father of an illegitimate child of which she had before that time been delivered; and it was thereupon ordered by the said court that the said Azariah should pay, towards the maintenance of said child, one dollar and fifty cents a week from the birth of the child until the further order of the court; and that he should give a bond, with sufficient surety or sureties, to pay the sum aforesaid, and also a bond to the town of Needham, to indemnify the said town from the maintenance of the said child ; and should pay costs of the prosecution. The plaintiff then alleges that the said Azariah has not performed any part of said order; and prays for a remedy by execution or warrant of distress.
To this writ the said Azariah answers by a general demurrer, which is joined by the plaintiff.
Richardson, of counsel for the plaintiff,
being called on to show that a writ of sdre facias lies in this case, * contended that this was, in fact, a judgment of a court of record ; and since the statute of Westm. 2, scire facias lies in many cases where it lay not at common law ; a formal judgment not being in all cases a prerequisite. Richardson stated the fact to have been, in this case, that the defendant, after the verdict was returned against him, had avoided; and as the magistrate before whom he was first carried had taken a recognizance instead of a bond, if the plaintiff could not maintain the present process, she would be without remedy.
Chickering for the defendant.
2 Inst. 469. —1 Lord Raym. 669—469. '
Vide 7 Mass Rep. 340—696.

Opinion:
Per Curiam,.
A writ of scire facias lies only to obtain execution of a judgment. This was merely an order that the defendant should give security, &c. The only mode of enforcing the performance of the order was to commit the defendant to prison until he should comply. The writ cannot be supported, and the defendant must take judgment for his costs.