Carter v. . Colman

34 N.C. 274
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided August 5, 1851·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Ruffin, C. J.

The judgment oh the scire facias is, that the plaintiff have execution on his original recovery, and nothing more, except as to the costs. It is not at all inconsistent, that the creditor should also have another judgment to recover the debt, and it cannot prejudice the defendant, as they are but different securities for the same debt, and satisfaction of either would be satisfaction of both judgments. A plaintiff may sue on a judgment, on which he may at the time have execution; and, indeed, the purposes of justice *275 may sometimes require it, as it may be necessary to the recovery of interest on a judgment for damages, or, as in this case, to obtain new bail, after the discharge of the former bail, under the statute of limitations. The debtor can always defeat a disposition to oppress him with costs by paying the debt.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Carter v. . Colman, 34 N.C. 274 (N.C. 1851).

34 N.C. 274 (Carter v. . Colman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Industrial National Bank v. Shalin
72 N.E.2d 52 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1947)
Quill v. Carolina Portland Cement Co.
124 So. 305 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Drennan v. Dunn
52 So. 313 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1910)
Bick v. Dry
114 S.W. 1146 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Springs v. Pharr.
42 S.E. 590 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1902)
Lafayette County v. Wonderly
92 F. 313 (Eighth Circuit, 1899)