Summary
In Parker v. Travers, 74 N.J. Eq. 812, it was held that where defendant was obliged to appeal to correct a decree against her which was improper, she was entitled to costs of the appeal, though complainant was successful in the suit.
Summary of this case from Rehberger v. RosenfeldOpinion
12-31-1907
PARKER v. TRAVERS.
Wilson, Carr & Stackhouse, for complain ant. Frank Durand and E. P. Longstreet, for defendant.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Bill by one Parker against one Travers. J. H. Backes moved for a stay of execution pending appeal. Stay granted.
The decree had declared that the amount ordered to be paid should be a lien upon the premises described in the bill of complaint. After the defendant had appealed therefrom, execution had been issued; but the writ was not, at the time of the motion, in the hands of the sheriff.
Wilson, Carr & Stackhouse, for complain ant. Frank Durand and E. P. Longstreet, for defendant.
WALKER, V. C., considered that it was not clear that the decree of itself would take priority as a lieu over executions levied under subsequent judgments. The case was not like a foreclosure, where the land had been specifically pledged for the debt. Under the circumstances of this case a stay is proper; but the sheriff should be permitted to proceed to bake a levy, and then further proceedings should be stayed, thus securing the complainant's priority, if the decree appealed from be affirmed.