case BEAMOND against long ante fol if a feme executrix to a mark and then  husband and wife bring debt on a obligation against b in right of the wife as  executrix and have judgement to recover debt damage and cost and the wife die  before execution the husband can have a to know facias on the judgement for  although he be privy thereto yet he be not entitle to the thing recover ante  post S C Jones SC roll godb roll cro James hob side cro Elizabeth Mod salk  skin Com dig Bac ab dougl this case be now move and argue by Maynard for the  defendant and by roll for the plaintiff and for the plaintiff be first argue  that although the husband shall not have a debt due to the wife after her  death without recovery yet if they bring debt and recover and after the wife  die the husband shall have that debt because transit in remember judge and  although the husband here shall have execution in the right of his wife as  administratrix he can not have it to his own use but to satisfy the debt of  the intestate and when they be satisfy he be Chargeable over in account to the  next administrator or peradventure shall be Chargeable for that debt as a  executor de son tort demesne and they have be at the charge to recover that  debt and cost and damage award to they it be no reason the husband shall lose  they and he cite one priest case in the common plea where a administrator  durante those inferior in rank lifetime recover in debt that the executor at  his full age may have execution of that debt but all the court hide chief  justice be dead and none in his place conceive that this to know facias lie  not for the first action be bring by the husband and wife administratrix which  be in another right and the recovery be thereupon be in right of the intestate  and the wife be dead the husband can claim that debt for be not be  administrator have not any interest therein for the administratrix be dead the  suit be mere determine and can be revive by any but by he who come in in that  right and so do not the husband and it differ not from the yearbook a where a  executor recover debt and die intestate the administrator can have a to know  facias because be be not privy to that judgement and be claim not paramount  the judgement and they doubt of priest case but it be clear if administration  be commit because no will be extant and the administrator recover in debt and  after the will be prove wherein there be a executor such a executor shall  never have a to know facias upon that judgement and although it be object that  the judgement be for cost and damage which belong to the husband although the  say debt do not belong to he and therefore the to know facias shall be  maintain for the damage yet the court hold that the to know facias to have  execution of the judgement for the debt and also for the damage be not  maintainable and whether he may maintain a to know facias for the damage and  cost they will not deliver any opinion yet it appear Edward pl if one recover  in a real action land and damage and die before execution the heir shall have  a to know facias to have execution for the land and the executor for the  damage but for the principal case they all hold that the to know facias lie  not as it be bring and give croak car judgement for the defendant this case be  move at the table at sergeantsinn to the chief baron and other baron and to  Harvey justice they all agree in the same opinion a vide postea a Henry pl  cite in Brudnels case   b a see car c by which a administrator de good non may  sue to know facias croak car er p