
    Philip B. Hallanan v. John Crow.
    By virtue of the provisions of section 463 of the code of civil procedure, as applied under the authority contained in section 202 of the justices' code (S. & C.'s Stat., 1089, 804), after the issuing of an execution against property, on a judgment before a justice of the peace, any person indebted to the judgment debtor, may pay to the constable the amount of his debt, or so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy the execution, and the constable's receipt will be a sufficient discharge for the amount so paid, or directed to be credited by the judgment creditor on the execution.
    Error to the court of common pleas of Montgomery county. Reserved in the district court.
    On July 26, 1858, Miller & Church obtained a judgment against Hallanan, the plaintiff in error, before a justice of the peace for $25.07.
    An execution was issued on this judgment, May 81,1859, and placed in the hands of Sage, a constable.
    Crow, the defendant in error, was indebted to Hallanan in the sum of $20.50 on an account for medical services.
    At the request of the constable, Sage, Crow paid to him, on the execution in his hands, in favor of Miller & Church against Hallanan, the $20.50 due to the latter from Crow and took the constable’s receipt therefor. The constable applied the payment unon the execution and made return thereof accordingly.
    
      Afterward, in September, 1859, Hallanan sued Crow, before a justice of the peace, for the $20.50, disregarding the payment to the constable. The case came into the court of common pleas by appeal.
    To Hallanan’s petition Crow filed an answer setting up the payment to the .constable, on the execution, and attached thereto a copy of the constable’s receipt. To this answer Hallanan demurred. The demurrer was overruled, exception taken and judgment entered in favor of Crow. To reverse that judgment Hallanan filed a petition in error in the district court; wherein the case was reserved to this court.
    
      J. A. Jordan, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Wm. Craighead, for defendant in error..
   By the Court :

Section 463 of the code of civil procedure, (S. & C.’s Stat. 1089), reads as follows:

“ After the issuing of execution against property, any person indebted to the judgment debtor, may pay to the sheriff the amount of his debt, or so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy the execution, and the sheriff’s receipt shall be a sufficient discharge for the amount so paid, or directed to be credited by the judgment creditor on the execution.”

Section 202 regulating the jurisdiction and procedure before justices of the peace, etc. (S. & C.’s Stat. 804), reads as follows:

“ The provisions of the act entitled ‘ an act to establish a code of civil procedure,’ passed March 11, 1853, which are in their nature applicable to the jurisdiction and proceedings before justices, and in respect to which no special provision is made by statute, are applicable to the proceedings before justices of the peace.”

So far as we are aware, section 463 of the code, copied above, contains the only statutory provisions upon the subject matter to which it relates. And we are of opinion that those provisions are, in their nature, applicable to the jurisdiction and proceedings before justices of the peace. Such application is expressly authorized by section 202 of the justices’ code above recited.

From this view, it follows that the demurer of the plaintiff to the answer of the defendant was properly overruled in thg court of common pleas

Judgment affirmed.  