
    Hannahan against The Executors of Hannahan.
    
      October, 1796.
    
    Upon entering up a judgment on a set fa, the ptainúffis entitled to his execution in-sia,ntei\ and is not to be delayed 30 days, ■where service of the original writ was not personal, as in the original suit.
    See Bay9s tfep. vol. i. p. 483. Utley's edit.
    MOTION for leave to issue an execution on a judgment on a sci.fa. on the last day of the court.
    This was opposed, on the ground that the 12th rule of court, founded on the act for the amendment of the law, directed that no execution should be issued until ten days after judgment, where the service of the original writ was personal; or until the expiration of thirty days after the motion for judgment, when the service of the original was not personal, but left at the defendant’s house or place of residence, or most notorious place of abode, as was the case in this suit.
   But by the court It was resolved, that the plaintiff is entitled to his execution instanter, on a judgment on a sci.fa. because, in a r ause of this nature, there can b'é no grounds alleged for surprise or undue advantage, or any thing which could affect the merits of the case, as the defendant had an opportunity of availing himself of every thing of that kind in the original suit, which was the reason for allowing thirty days to defendant to move for a new trial, or in arrest of judgment; so that nothing but payment or satisfaction can be pleaded to a sci. fa. to revive a judgment, as was determined in the case of Gibbes and Waimvright, in September, 1795. And if the plaintiff has given a year and a- day of indulgence after the original judgment, and no pay»* aient or satisfaction pleaded, there can be no reason assigned why he should be kept longer out of his money.

The mo.tion was, therefore, granted accordingly.

All the judges present..  