Case: William Taylor and others, Appellants, v. George M. Savage, Executor of Samuel Savage, deceased, defendant
Abbreviation: Taylor v. Savage
Decision Date: 1844-01
Docket Number: 
Citation: 2 How. 395
Volume: 43
Reporter: United States Reports
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: William Taylor and others, Appellants, v. George M. Savage, Executor of Samuel Savage, deceased, defendant.
Judges: 
Pages: 395–397

Head Matter:
William Taylor and others, Appellants, v. George M. Savage, Executor of Samuel Savage, deceased, defendant.
The case of Taylor and others v. Savage, 1 Howard, 282, examined and. confirmed.
This case came before the court at the last term,- and is reported in 1 Howard, 282.
It was brought up again on a motion to dismiss the appeal.
Mqrehead, who made the motion,
referred tp the decision at the last term, and said that notwithstanding that decision, the case was still here.. He considered the opinion of the court as covering the" whole ground.
Crittenden, contra.
Both partjes. appealed from the decision of the court below; but Savage did not perfect his appeal. There is a difficulty in making proper parties, if the case is sent back! The law of Alabama says that administration of the estate shall be attached to the office of sheriff, but his official term will soon expire, and we shall have to litigate with temporary administrators.
Berrien, on the same side,
thought there was still a case before the court upon which it could act. It is true that the. decree below was rendered on the same day that the administrator was removed; but notwithstanding this, it was well rendered. If a party dies, the court will direct a judgment to be entered as on the first day of the term. 2 Peters, 481,
There is no difference between a parly dying and one in a representative character being removed. This must have been the view of the court; the validity of the decree must have been recognised when they said that the voluntary appearance of Benham would cure all defects. The decree could not have been considered null. If the decree was well rendered, the appeal was well- taken, because it vtas taken at the same term whilst the proceedings were within the power of the court. The appeal was prayed and allowed in open court. This court can now proceed either,
1. By Benham’s voluntary appearance, or
2. By issuing process to bring him in.
1. This was decided at the last term.
2. Benham’s will cannot give the court jurisdiction. The.28th rule provides for the death of a party and summoning another to take his place, The same power that adopted this rule can modify it and say that the successor to an executor can be summoned. The power to establish a general rule involves the power to make a special one to suit' a particular case; general .rules are made only to prevent specific orders.
Sergeant, in reply and conclusion,
argued at some length that the decision at the last term covered the case as it now stood. The party on- the other, side must, go into the court below and have the record put into, a-correct.form.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice STORY
delivered the opinion of the court.
The court have had this case under-consideration, and are' of opinion that it is completely governed by -,the decision made in the' same case at the last term of this court, which is reported in 1 Howard's Rep. 282. An attempt has been made at'the bar to distinguish the former decision from that how sought, by suggesting -that- the former proceeded mainly upon the ground that .the appeal was irregularly made, and did not directly involve the question now argued. We think otherwise; and that the ground of that decision completely covers all that has been urged upon the present occasion,; not-as mere incidental.suggestions, but as the very hinge on which the case turned. Notwithstanding the opinion of this court then expressed, that the case might- be remanded to the District Court, for the pur-' pose of making the proper parties, the appellants have neglected, during a whole year, to take a single step for the remanding of the case, or instituting any proceedings in the court below; which laches certainly ought not to produce any result in their favour.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed, and the cause is remanded to the District Courtof the northern district of Alabama, with leave to the appellants to make the proper parties, and to the new administrator, Benham, to become a party to the suit; and that such other proceedings be had as to law and justice shall appertain.
ORDER.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the District Court of the United States for the northern district-of Alabama, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, It is ordered and decreed by this court, that this appeal be,- and the same is hereby dismissed, and' that this- cause be, and the samé is hereby remanded to the said District Court, with leave to the appellants to make the proper parties, and to the new administrator, Behham, to become a party to the suit; and that such other proceedings be had therein as te law and justice shall appertain.