
    Peter Morris, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Thomas J. Walsh, Defendant and Appellant.
    It was decided in this case, that the imprisonment of a debtor does not prevent the plaintiffs’ remedies for enforcing the judgment;
    That it is no excuse for not complying with a judgment directing the execution of a conveyance, that the Conveyance prepared for execution was not tendered at the time of serving a copy of the judgment and a demand of compliance; nor that the defendant was imprisoned, and that when the conveyance was tendered fdr execution there was no witness, or officer to take the acknowledgment, present, and no seal upon the instrument; and, That proceedings to punish for contempt in not complying with one part of a decree do not preclude subsequent proceedings to put the party in contempt in respect to another part.
    Heard, at General Term, before all the Justices,
    October 11, 1862;
    decided, October 18, 1862.
    See the points decided, in the index to this volume, under the titles “Imprisoned Debtor; Practice—Contempt; Practice—Judgment.”
   And see the motion and appeal reported at length, with the opinion of the Court, in 14 Abbotts’ Pr., 387.  