OBLE has a judgment in Fayette superior court against the: — , executors of Howard, and they have a judgment in this court against' him, and this is a scire facias against them to shew cause why Noble’s judgment should not be set against theirs, and they to have execution for the balance, if any : and it is now stated in-court that the estate of Howard is insolvent, and if the executors, are permitted to levy their debt, Noble will probably not.be able to get the amount of his judgment refunded by having it levied, against them, in support of the sci. fa.
Mr. Moore, for the plaintiff,
cited 2. Burr. 1229, Baskerville vs. Brown, and Barker’s administratrix vs. Brohim, 2. Bl. Rep.;. S69.
Taylor e contra.-
There is no new case to shew that a judgment in one court as this is shall be deducted out of the amount «.f a judgment in another. The last case cited, is indeed of judgments in the courts of common pleas and kings bench, and the one being deducted from the other; but these courts set under the same roof. In the cases now before the court, they are the judgment of two different courts, sitting for two distinct and separate districts.
Per curiam,
Williams and Haywood.
The reason of the thing is the same in both cases; the common pleas is as much a. distinct court from the king’s bench as two superior courts held for different districts. Let the judgment in Fayette be deducted from the judgment here as prayed by the scire facias and, exe>* ention issue for the balance only.