If the original judgment be reversed, the reversal of the
dependent judgment on the "forthcoming bond" follows of course, but
a special certiorari is necessary to bring up the execution upon
which the bond was given, so as to show the connection between the
two judgments.
Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Virginia on a
judgment rendered on a bond (technically called, in Virginia, a
"forthcoming bond") given to the marshal with condition to have
certain goods forthcoming at the day of sale appointed by the
marshal, being goods which he had seized under a
fi. fa.
issued upon a former judgment recovered by Petit & Bayard
against Barton, which judgment was reversed at the last term of
this Court.
Page 11 U. S. 289
WASHINGTON, J. delivered the opinion of the Court as
follows:
This is a writ of error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of
Virginia rendered upon a bond given by the plaintiffs in error with
condition for the delivery at a certain time and place of property
seized by the marshal to satisfy an execution which had issued from
the same court. The condition not having been complied with, this
judgment was rendered upon motion and notice thereof duly served
upon the obligors in the bond, agreeably to the laws of
Virginia.
It is not pretended that there is any intrinsic error in this
judgment to warrant its reversal, but it is contended that the
reversal of the original judgment, upon which the proceedings in
this record took place, requires necessarily the reversal of this
judgment. The general doctrine is undeniably so, but the
application of it to this case is not admitted. That the judgment
in this record is dependent upon some other judgment is apparent
from the bond which recites a prior execution and seizure by the
marshal of the property mentioned in the condition for the purpose
of satisfying it, but it does not appear judicially to the Court
that the recited execution issued upon the identical judgment which
has been reversed. The only difficulty which the Court has felt has
been to devise some proper mode in this, as well as in all similar
cases which may hereafter arise, to connect with the original
reversed judgment that which is asserted to be dependent upon
it.
A certiorari upon a suggestion of diminution would not answer
the purpose, as the proceedings in the original suit form no part
of those in the subsequent suit, the only foundation of which are
the bond and notice. Neither does it appear regular for this Court
to receive as evidence of the dependency of the latter upon the
former judgment the certificate of the clerk of the circuit
court.
The Court has thought it best to direct a special writ to be
framed applicable to cases of this nature, to be directed to the
clerk of the court in which the judgments were rendered, to certify
under the seal of the
Page 11 U. S. 290
court, the execution recited in the bond on which the second
judgment was rendered. This difficulty can never occur except in
cases where all the proceedings in the original judgment except the
execution are already before this Court. The execution, therefore,
though no part of either the original or dependent record, being
certified by the proposed writ, will supply the only link necessary
to prove the connection between the two judgments.
In this case, the Court, from the novelty of the practice
necessary to be adopted, will not permit the plaintiff in error to
suffer in consequence of his not having applied sooner for a writ
of certiorari, but will now direct the same to issue. In future,
the party must take the consequences of his neglect if he should
fail to have the execution certified in time.
WASHINGTON, J.
The Court has examined the execution which has been sent up by
certiorari, and is satisfied that the judgment on which it issued
is that which was reversed at the last term. The judgment,
therefore, on the forthcoming bond must be reversed also.
Judgment reversed.