Chipps v. Yancey, 1 Ill. 19, 1 Breese 19 (1819)

Dec. 1819 · Illinois Supreme Court

1 Ill. 19, 1 Breese 19

Amos Chipps, Appellant, v. Thomas Yancey, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM POPE.

The plea of nil debet is not a good plea to an action of debt upon a record.

Opinion of the Court.^* This was an action of debt on a judgment rendered in the State of Kentucky. The defendant pleaded nil debet, to which there was a demurrer, which the court sustained. To reverse this opinion, this appeal was taken. It is considered by the court, that the judgment of the court below, sustaining the plaintiff’s demurrer, to the defendant’s plea, be affirmed with costs, ^(a) ⁽¹⁾

Judgment affirmed.

* Justice Wilson having decided this cause in the court below, gave no opinion.

(a) Nil debet is a bad plea in an action of debt brought on a judgment obtained in another State. Armstrong v. Carsars, exr., 2 Dall, 302. Mills v. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 480.

Nil debet is not a good plea to an action of debt on a recognizance, nor to any action founded on a record or specialty. Bullís v. Giddins, 8 Johns., 82.

(1) In an action of debt brought on a sheriff’s bond, the plea of nil debet is bad on demurrer. Where a bond is'the foundation of an action of debt, nil debet is not a good plea. It is otherwise where the instrument is but the inducement to the action. Davis v. Burton et al., 3 Scam., 42. King v. Ramsey, 13 Ills. R., 622.