North v. Swing
This text of 24 Tex. 193 (North v. Swing) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As more than a year had elapsed from the rendition of the judgment, and no execution had issued thereon, the judgment had lost its lien, and become dormant. It required to be revived, in order to authorize the issuance of execution. As this was not done, the execution in question was unauthorized, and was therefore rightly enjoined. This will not prevent the plaintiffs in execution, from proceeding to revive their judgment, and have execution. If, in their answer, they had sought a revival of the judgment, it might, perhaps, have been so adjudged in this ease. (Cyrus v. Hicks, 20 Texas Rep. 483.) But, upon the case, as presented, there is no error in the judgment, and it is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
24 Tex. 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-v-swing-tex-1859.