Armsworthy v. . Cheshire , 17 N.C. 234 ( 1832 )

Daniei, Judge,

after stating the pleading as above set forth, proceeded: If the scire Judas against the plaintiffs never was served, the judgment entered on the same, at the return thereof was void, and they had complete relief in a’courtof law, and have no right to come into this court for redress. Whether the writ was, or was not served on the plaintiffs, does not appear; no copy of the record of that suit being filed.

As to the next point in the case, viz: that the defendant agreed to take the South-Carolina claim as a satisfaction of his judgment in the first place, that it does not appear to the court, such an agreement ever was made j and in the second place, if the plaintiffs were able, to establish it, they, instead of coming into this court, should havc pleaded the same to the scire facias. They could have defended themselves at law. under the plea of accord and satisfaction, and if the issue had been found for them, the defendant never could hav-e had judgment against the lands. Equity does not relieve when a party neglects a proper defence at law, (1 Mad. c. 77, Ware v. Haywood, 14 Ves. 28.) We think that the bill, for these reasons, should be dismissed.

PER CuRIAM. — Bill. DISMISSED.