TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Plough v. Reeves

Plough v. Reeves and Others

Plough v. Reeves, 33 Ind. 181 (1870)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 1, 1870
Judges
Gregory
Citations
33 Ind. 181
Headnotes
Execution. — Motion for After Ten Years. — Assignment of Error. — A proceeding to obtain leave of court to issue an execution on a judgment after the lapse of ten years from the entry thereof is a simple motion, to be heard by the court in a summary, way, the only question being whether the judgment or any part thereof remains unsatisfied and due. No pleadings are required or contemplated by the statute, and the action of the court in striking out pleadings filed cannot be the basis of an assignment of error in the Supreme Court. If the judgment-defendant has any equities, or cross action, he must resort to his remedy by suit.
Summary
APPEAL from the Howard Common Pleas.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Gregory

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Gregory, C. J.

This is a motion for “leave of court”.to issue an execution on a judgment after the lapse of ten years from the entry thereof.

Plough, the appellant, filed an answer in six paragraphs, ■the first of which was a denial that the judgment was unsatisfied. The court below, on motion, struck out the third .and fourth paragraphs, to which the defendant excepted.

The defendant, on motion, was required to furnish the plaintiffs with a full and complete bill of particulars to each remaining special paragraph of the answer. The defendant «excepted. On the failure of the defendant to comply with *182 the order, the court struck out the remaining paragraphs except the denial.

C. N. Pollard and H. A. Brouse, for appellant. J. W. Robinson, for appellees.

The issue was submitted to the court; finding for the plaintiffs; motion for a new trial overruled; and execution awarded, on the judgment.

The section of the statute under which this proceeding was. had is as follows: “After the lapse of ten years from the entry of a judgment, an execution ears he issued only on leave of court, upon motion, after teD days personal notice to the adverse party.” * * * * “ Such leave shall not be given, unless it he established by the oath of the party, or other satisfactory proof, that the judgment, or some part thereof, remains .unsatisfied and due.” Acts 1867, p. 102, sec. 406.

No pleadings are contemplated or required in a proceeding of this kind. It is a simple motion, to he heard by the court, in a summary way; the only question being whether the judgment, or any part thereof “remains unsatisfied and due.”

If the judgment-defendant has. any equities, or cross- action, he must resort to his remedy by suit, in which pleadings and a trial by jury can be had. Therefore the action of the court below on the pleadings cannot be the basis for the assignment of error In this court.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1872–1873: 11874–1875: 11880–1881: 21890–1891: 11892–1893: 11896–1897: 11916–1917: 118722026peak 1880 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Crawford v. Foster83 F. 975 (7th Cir. 1897)
  2. Evansville Gas-Light Co. v. State ex rel. Reitz73 Ind. 219 (1881)
  3. Reeves v. Plough46 Ind. 350 (1874)
  4. Jaseph v. Schnepper27 N.E. 305 (Ind. Ct. App. 1891)
  5. Blizzard v. Blizzard40 Ind. 344 (1872)
  6. Coffin v. Pfau112 N.E. 21 (Ind. Ct. App. 1916)

Most recent

  1. Coffin v. Pfau112 N.E. 21 (Ind. Ct. App. 1916)
  2. Crawford v. Foster83 F. 975 (7th Cir. 1897)
  3. Van Devanter v. Nixon31 N.E. 203 (Ind. Ct. App. 1892)
  4. Jaseph v. Schnepper27 N.E. 305 (Ind. Ct. App. 1891)
  5. Evansville Gas Light Co. v. State ex rel. Reitz1 Ind. L. Rep. 361 (1881)
  6. Evansville Gas-Light Co. v. State ex rel. Reitz73 Ind. 219 (1881)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list