
    Williams v. Englebrecht.
    A judgment of reversal is effective notwithstanding the death of the plaint- . iff in error during the pendency of proceedings in error. Such judgment takes effect, by relation, as of the date of the commencement of the proceeding in error; and it is competent for the court, to which the cause is remanded for a new trial, to order a revivor of the action in the name of the proper representative of the deceased party.
    Error to the District Court of Scioto County.
    
      Motion to reinstate, &c.
    At the last term of this court, a final judgment was rendered in this case, reversing the judgment of the district court and remanding the cause for a new trial.
    It is now made to appear that John D. Williams, plaintiff in error, died during the pendency of the proceedings in error. The object of the present motion is to reinstate the case on the docket, set aside the judgment of reversal, revive the action in the names of the representatives of the deceased plaintiff in error, in order that the judgment of reversal may be entered in the name of such representatives.
    
      J. W. Bcmnon and W. A. Hutchins, for the motion.
    
      F. O. Secwi and O. F. Moore, contra.
   By the Court.

Notwithstanding the death of the plaintiff in error after the assignment of errors and before final judgment, the judgment of reversal is valid and effective. By relation, the judgment of reversal takes effect as of the date of the commencement of the proceedings in error.

True, the original action must be revived before a new trial can be had in the court below; but such revivor may be had in the court to which the cause has been remanded for a new trial. See Block v. Hill, 29 Ohio St. 86, and Foresman v. Haag, 37 Ohio St. 143.

Motion overruled.  