HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0299 and id is 1 raw text is: 4 SUPREME COURT.
Brown v. Clarke.
Jixas BRQwN, PLAINTIFF IN iRoR, v, Jowc CLZA , DzFZtDANT.
By the law of.Mifssisaippi, a judgment is a lien upon pemonal as well as real estate
'from the time-of its rendition.
Where there has been a judgment, an execution levied upon ronal property,
'and a fbrthcoming bond; the property levied upon is releasel by the bond, and
the lien of the judgment destroyed.
i*; therefore, dier this, another judgment be entered against the original defendant,
this second judgment is a lien upon the property which has been released by
the bond.
The lien thus acquired by the' second junment is not destroyed by subsequently
quashing the forthcoming bond. The effect of such quashing is not to revive the
firstjudgment, and thus restore the lien which was superseded by the execution
of the bond.
If the forthcoming bond had been shown to have been void ab initio, the result
would be different.
In cases of conflicting executions issued out of the federal and state courts, a prior-
ity is given to that under which there i3 an actual aeizure of the property first.
The mode in which bills of exceptions ought to be taken, as explamed in Walton
v. The United States (9 Wheat. 651), and in 4 Peters, 102, iill be strictly ad-
hered to by this court.
THIs was a writ of error to the District Court of the United
States for the Northern District of Mississi]pi, to bring up for
review certain instructions delivered to the jury in an action of
trover, brought by the. defendant in error against the plaintiff in
error, and in which the plaintiff below obtained the verdict.
The case was this. Brown, the defendant below, obtained a
judgment of $ 8,64037, by confession, against one Haywood
Cozart, in the Circuit Court of Lafayette County, Mississigpi,
which was docketed on the 18th of May, 1840. Upon wich
execution was issued on the 6th, and delivered to the sheriff on
the 20th of June following, an& a levy made the same day on sev-
eral slaves, the property of the defendant on the execution. A
forthcoming bond was given by the defendant, with H. M. Cozart
as surety, and which was approved of by Brown, the plainliff.
This bond is in the penalty of double the amount of the judg-
ment, ;nade payable to the plaintiff in the execution, and condition-
ed well and truly to deliver the property levied on to the sheriff on
the 17th of August (then) next, the day of sale, at a certain place,
to be sold to satisfy the judgment, unless the same should be pre-
viously paid.
Clarke, the defendant in error, recovered a judgment of
$ 2,11731 against the same Haywood Cozart, in the District
Court of the United States for the Northern District of Missis-
sippi, at the June term of said court, 1840 ; upon which an exe-
cution was. issued to the marshal of the district, and a levy made,,
on the 9th of November following, upon six of the slaves in the
possession of Cozart, and which had been before levied on under
Brown's execution. They were -sold by the marshal on the 7th
December- thereafter, and purchased in by Clarke, the plaintiff,
the highest bidder.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0299&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)