
    Coffee vs Wray, et al.
    
    A’s judgment was rendered on the 1st of November, 1833, in Davidson county. On the 19lh February, 1834, execution issued to the sheriff of Overton county, on this judgment tested the 3d Monday in January, 1834, and was placed in the hands of the sberiiF, on the 14th of March, 1834. B’s judgment was had on the 6th of hlov., 1833, in Overton county, where defendant'lived; alias, execution issued thereon to the sheriff of Overton ciunty, on the 14th of March, 1834, tested of the first Monday of February, 1834, and was placed in the sheriff’s hands on the 15th of March, 1834. Both executions were levied on the personal property of the debtor: Held, that A’s execution had a priority, and must be first satisfied: Held, also, that executions issuing from the courts of different counties, bind the personal property of the debtor from their teste, and not from the time when placed in the hands of the sheriff, 
    
    On the 6th day of November, 1833, Joel T. Coffee, the plaintiff in error, recovered a judgment against V. Matlock and Thomas K. M’Donald, in the Overton county court, for seven hundred dollars. Matlock was the sheriff. On the 23d December, 1833, Coffee had an execution issued and delivered to the coroner, but too 'late to be executed, and was so returned.
    On the 14th March, 1834, an alias execution issued upon this judgment, tested first Monday in February, 1834, and was delivered to the coroner on the same day issued. On the 8th of February, 1833, S. G. Smith obtained a judgment against Matlock in the same court,, for one hundred and thirty-seven dollars and twenty-two cento, upon which execution was-issued 18th February, 1834, and delivered to the coroner on the same day, and tested the first Monday in February, 1834. On the 14th of March, 1834, the Bank of the State having a judgment in the circuit court of Overton, against Matlock, for thirteen hundred and six dollars and forty-fiveicents, caused an execution to he issued, and on the same day delivered to the coroner, tested first Monday of March, 1834. On 21st February, 1834, Duncan and Allgood having a judg-' Snent m the same court against Matlock for forty-five dol-i i . ° tars, took out an execution tested first Monday of February, 1834,' and delivered it to the coroner, on 14th of March, 1834. On the first day of November, 1833, the Bank of the State of Tennessee recovered five different judgments against said Matlock 'and others, in the county court of Davidson, one for four hundred and seventeen dollars, one for two hundred an'd eigiht dollars and twenty-five cents, one for four hundred and twenty-seven dollars, one for three hundred and forty-four dollars and seventy-five cents, and one for one hundred and thirty-two dollars and twenty-five cents; upon each of these judgments executions were issued to the coroner of Over-ton county j on'the 19th of February, 1834, and came to his hands on the 14th_of March, 1834, and tested the third Monday of January, 1834.
    On the 15th of March, 1834, the coroner levied all of these executions upon the personal property of Mat-lock, which he sold on the 28th of April, 1834, for seven hundred and eight dollars and forty-six and three-fourth cents. He returned the executions j setting forth the facts truly, and calling upon the court to ,say to whom he should pay the money.
    At the August session, 1834, of the Overton county court, Coffee moved against Wray, the coroner, for judgment, and to have the money applied to his execution, and the court gave him judgment against the coroner and securities, who appealed to the circuit court, where the judgment in the county court was reversed, and the coroner directed to pay the money in satisfaction of the five executions of the Bank, from which Coffee-appealed to this court, in the nature of a writ of error.
    
      •A. Cullom, for plaintiff in error.
    
      A. J. Marchbanks and J. Rucks., for the defendants in error.
   Peck, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

The court is called upon to settle the priority of contending execution creditors. i

On the 6th of November, 1833, Coffee recovered in the Overton county court, judgment against Matlock for seven hundred dollars. On the 23d of December, 1833, he caused execution to issue, hut which was not levied, and had no effect. On the 14th of March, 1834, another execution issued on Coffee’s judgment, and on that day was placed in the coroner’s hands, tested the first Monday of February, 1834. On the first day of November, 1833, the State Bank recovered against Matlock, in the Davidson county court, five several judgments; on the 19th of February, 1834, execution issued on three judgments, bearing teste the third Monday of January, 1834, and on the 14th of March, 1834, were placed in the hands of the coroner. He levied the executions of Coffee, of the Bank, and of others in his hands, on the personal property of Matlock, at the same time, and sold by virtue of them to the amount of seve,n hundred' and eight dollars. The amount levied will not satisfy the executions of the Bank, nor that of Coffee, and the question is, who is entitled to the money? The circuit court ordered it to be applied to the executions of the Bank, and refused to enter judgment against Wray, the coroner, in favor of Coffee; and we think correctly. The executions of the Bank, although emanating upon judgments recovered in another county, bound the personal property of the debtor equally with Coffee’s, as this courtheld in Hickman vs. Murfree (Mar. & Yer. Rep. 26); and being of the oldest test, were entitled to be first satisfied. They bound thepersonal property of Matlock from their teste. Peck’s Rep. 34, 35, 50, 51; 1 Yer. Rep. 291. The judgment will be affirmed. ,

Judgment affirmed.  