case bind against plain if a plaintiff who have obtain judgement in a inferior  court be by any mean in possession of the defendant good and redelivers they  to he oik a promise that his debt shall he pay it I a good consideration in  assumpsit though the defendant lad only a special interest in they and the  general property reside with a three person and neither the authority of the  inferior court nor where the good be nor the time or place of request need he  allege post Cowper term Rep the plaintiff count that whereas he recover  against Thomas ware in the queen court in Southwark hold before the steward of  the mayor of London twelve pound and have a become facias to the bailiff there  to make execution of the good of the say Thomas ware which be in his hand and  whereasthe bailiff be ready to do execution of the say good the defendant do  assume to the plaintiff in consideration that he ilth of Septemher deliver to  he the say good that he will within fourteen day after Michaelmas pay to he  twenty mark or otherwise deliver to he the say good again if in the mean time  no other make title to they and prove they to he his good and aver that none  make title to they hetween the ill that of Septemher and fourteen day after  Michaelmas the defendant plead non assumpsit the jury find the recovery and  the ass sit but find further that the say Thomas ware long time before the  recovery have sell the good to r W but with this proviso that he shall have  the possession of they for four year which be not yet expire and if he then  pay such a sum of money the sale shall he void and that r W make title to they  by force of this sale et si c Cooper sergeant allege that the declaration be  not good first because it be not show by what title the court of Southwark be  hold second that the bailiff be ready to make execution but show not where the  good be but these exception be overrule not to he material for they be but the  inducement and conveyance to the action three there be neither time nor place  of request allege but only stepius requisite say non allocatur for it be to he  pay at a day certain and no request needful otherwise if request ought to have  been made Fourthly that upon the matter find judgement ought to be for the  defendant for it be find the plaintiff have only a special property and the  vendee the general property and so no cause of thevredelivery and so no cause  of the consideration and it be find the vendee have title so it be sufficient  prove a stranger have title But Pas Elizabeth the court resolve for the  plaintiff for they hold that the plaintiff have possession of the good however  he come to they he be Chargeable to Thomas ware for they although he have but  a special property and he may maintain a action for they so his delivery of  the good be a sufficient consideration for by this the defendant have the  benefit of the use of they and the plaintiff have loss for a see the case of  Sacheverelv Frogart I vent sand ray lev where this point be adjudge and the  existence of the case in Edward deny see   a croak Elizabeth er p he be  Chargeable to the action of Thomas ware and especial the consideration croak  Elizabeth be good be only for the redelivery of they or payment of such a sum  and although he recite that he have these good liable to the execution which  be not true for Thomas ware have only a special property they be not liable to  this debt yet this be but a naked and void recital and all the substance of  the declaration be upon the delivery of they and this be find it with  assumpsit as a good psit it be adjudge for the plaintiff and on error bring  the judgement be affirm a