
    CASE 31 — PETITION EQUITY
    DECEMBER 20.
    Webb vs. Wright.
    APPEAL FROM MADISON CIRCUIT COURT.
    The Madison circuit court has no jurisdiction, in a proceeding in rem, to enforce a lien on land in Estill county.
    Squire Turner, For Appellant,
    CITED—
    
      Civil Code, sec. 93.
    
      Rev. Stat., 230, chap. 80, sec. 26.
    18 B. Mon., 650; Chapman vs. Stockioell.
    
    Burnam & Caperton, For Appellee,
    CITED—
    14 B. Mon., 489; Devine vs. Mitchell.
    
    1 J. J. Mar., 500; Boyce vs. Watson,
    9 Dana, 412; Savage vs. Carter.
    
    17 B. M., 211; Black vs. Bush.
    
    
      12 B. M., 357; Peyton vs. Lewis.
    
    8 Dana, 298; Connell vs. Sandridge's adm'i.
    
    6 B. M., 130; Pearson vs. Kelly.
    
    
      Hardings Rep., 535; Reading vs. Metcalfe.
    
   JUDGE BOBEBTSON

delivered the opinion of the court:

Perceiving no substantial error in tbe personal judgment against the appellant Webb, rendered at the March term, 1866, that judgment is affirmed.

But the Madison circuit court having no jurisdiction to enforce an alleged lien on land in Estill county, the j udgment in rem, rendered at the June term, 1866, is reversed, and the cause remanded for execution on the judgment in personam.  