A judgment against an executor or heir where the plea is false, to the defendant's own knowledge, may be a general judgment as if the recovery was for his own debt, but in other cases a judgment against an execu tor is generally special, to be levied of the goods or land of his testator; 7 Taunt. 580.
A judgment on a covenant of a married woman against her separate estate may be entered as a personal judgment against her ; Williamson v. Cline, 40 W. Va. 194, 20 S. E. 917 ; such judgment must be entered in a special form ; 14 Ch. D. 837; but the record need show no special fact fixing her liability ; Jester v. Hunter, 2 Pa. Dist. R. 690.
In dower, judgment for demandant is in terlocutory in the first instance with the award of a writ of habere facies seisinam, and inquiry of damages, on the return of which final judgment is rendered for the value of the land detained, as ascertained by the jury, from the death of the husband to the suing out of the inquisition, and costs of suit. See the form, 3 Chitty, Pl. 583.
In ejectment, judgment for plaintiff is final in the first instance, that he recover the term, together with the damages assess ed by the jury, and the costs of suit, with award of the writ of habere facies posses sionem, directing the sheriff to put him in possession. See the form, 3 Bla. Com. App. xii.; Tidd, Pr. Forms 188. A judgment in ejectment is conclusive as to title between the parties thereto, unless the jury find for the plaintiff less than the fee; McDowell v. Sutline, 78 Ga. 142, 2 S. E. 937. A consent verdict in ejectment is condusive on the parties and their privies ; id.
In partition, judgment for plaintiff is also interlocutory in the first instance; quod par titio fiat with award of the writ de partiti one faoienda, on the return of which final judgment is rendered,— "therefore it is con sidered that the partition aforesaid be held firm and effectual forever," quod partitio facia firma et stabilis vn perpetuam tenea tur; Co. Litt. 169. See the form, 2 Sell. Pr. 319, 2d ed. 222.
In replevin. If the replevin is in the deti nuit, i,. e. where the plaintiff declares that the chattels "were detained until replevied by the sheriff," judgment for plaintiff is that he recover the damages assessed by the jury for the taking and unjust detention, or for the detention only where the taking was justifiable, and also his costs; Easton v. Worthington, 5 S. & R. (Pa.) 130; Hamm.
N. P. 488. If the replevin is in the detinet, i. e. where the plaintiff declares that the chattels taken are "yet detained," the jury in giving a verdict for plaintiff find, in addi tion to the above, the value of the chattels each separately; for the defendant will perhaps restore some, in which case the plaintiff is to recover the value of the re mainder ; Hamm. N. P. 489 ; Fitzh. N. B. 159 b; Easton v. Worthington, 5 S. & R. (Pa.) 130.
If the replevin be abated, the judgment is that the writ or plaint abate, and that the defendant, having avowed, have a return of the chattels.
If the plaintiff is nonsuited, the judgment for defendant, at common law, is that the chattels be restored to him, and that with out his first assigning the object of the tak ing, because by abandoning his suit the plain tiff admits that he had no right to dispos sess the defendant by prosecuting the re plevin. The form of this judgment is simply "to have a return," pro retorno habendo, without adding the words "to hold irreplevis able;" Hamm. N. P. 490. For the form of judgments of nonswit under the statutes 21 Hen. VIII. c. 19, and 17 Car. II. c. 7, see Hamm. N. P. 490; 2 Chitty, Pl. 161; 8 Wentw. Pl. 116; 5 S. & R. 132 ; 1 Saund. 195, n. 3 ; 2 id. 286, n. 5. In these cases the defendant has the option of taking his judg ment pro retorno habendo at common law ; Easton v. Worthington, 5 S. & R. (Pa.) 130, supra; 3 Term 349.
When the avowant succeeds upon the merits, the common-law judgment is that he "have return irreplevisable ;" for it is ap parent that he is by law entitled to keep possession of the goods ; Wallace v. Elder, 5 S. & R. (Pa.) 145; Hamm. N. P. 493; 1 Chitty, Pl. 162. For the form of judgment in such case under the statutes last mention ed, see Hamm. N. P. 494.