coke b hoe case Trin Elizabeth in the exchequer a have judgement in the KB to  recover a certain sum of money against b and assign it to the queen with  proviso to be void on the revocation of the baron of the exchequer or any two  of they judgement against b be affirm on error bring and on process out of the  exchequer the land of b be extend and his good of the value of the debt assign  be seize by the sheriff but the writ be not return after the death of a three  of the baron revoke the assignment and on the executor of a sue a to know  facias to have execution of the say sum of money c it be resolve that the  execution for the queen be good as to the good although the writ be not return  so on be made fa in the case of a common person the execution be good without  a return of the writ in capias ad sit the execution be good although the writ  be not return but capias in process must be return but in elegits the writ  must be return for there the extent be to be make by inquest after the  execution have by the queen the revocation come too late good sell by the  sheriff on a capias utlagatum shall be restore to the party on reversal of the  outlawry but a sale of good on a be made fa shall not be avoid by a subsequent  reversal of the judgement the power for the baron or any two of they to revoke  if no execution have be will have be well perform by the three otherwise if  the clause of the revocation have be by they joint or several S C Moor between  clement hoe executor of John hoe plaintiff and boulton defendant the case be  such John hoe the testator have judgement to recover in the king bench against  boulton S d John hoe assign it by deed enrol to the queen in satisfaction of a  debt due to the queen by he as collector of fifteen with proviso that if the  Lord treasurer and baron of the exchequer or any two of they because the debt  can not be levy in convenient time or for any other reasonable cause disallow  of the say assignment and revoke it by write under their hand then the  assignment shall be void and afterward boulton bring a writ of error accord to  the new statute and there judgement be affirm and cost OD the affirmance of  the judgement and afterward on process which be call a writ of prerogative out  of the exchequer on the say assignment the land of boulton be extend and his  good which be of value above the say debt coke a assign be seize by the  sheriff by force of the say writ but the writ be not return and afterward  periam Ewens and Southerton three of the baron revoke the assignment after the  testator death because the testator have satisfy coke report b er p the debt  which be due to the queen by he as collector and now the plaintiff as executor  of I hoe sue a to know facias to have execution of the say S d and cost and  the say matter be disclose by special plead a demurrer in law be join and in  this case three point be resolve that the execution for the queen be good  without question as to the good although the writ be not return and so it be  in case of a common person if the sheriff by force of a writ of become facias  levy the debt and deliver it to the party the execution be good without a  return of the writ Acc per Bridgman CJ keate v Kloplon Bridgm Hounteney v  Andrews cro Elizabeth per holt CJ Shirley v wright salk ovial v piner salk per  Lord Hardwicke jeans v Wilkins I Ves Com dig return f Semb contra peploe v  Gulliers b more a as it be adjudge h a and h a and so be it adjudge in the  common plea pasch Elizabeth between rook and Willimote and Trin Elizabeth  between mount and Andrews and therewith agree e so if a man be take on a  capias ad Cr Elizabeth lane h a h a b h cro car more Owen   a a to give  satisfaction the execution be well do although the writ be never return and  the difference be apparent between capias in process and capias ad to give  satisfaction for if the capias roll lane h a   a b in process be not return  the arrest be tortuous for there the end of the arrest be to the intent the  party shall appear and answer the plaintiff but in all writ of execution when  the sheriff alone do it as capias ad to give satisfaction to have facias  seisinam or possession become fac free c if the execution be duly do it be  good although the writ be not return it have be say that the sheriff can  justify under the writ unless he show it to be return per holt CJ freeman v  blewitt salk Com dig pleader m but this be question by Mr Tidd who take the  distinction in the text sum prd between mesne and final process Tidds practice  that edition b for there the plaintiff have the effect of the suit and no  other thing be to be do on his part after but in case of   a c elegit because  there the extent be to be make by inquest and not by the sheriff only it ought  to be return otherwise it be nought worth so by these resolution in the case  at bar and by the say judgement here cite you will learn the law and better  understand your book in e to know facias h b and   a a Fulwoods case in the  four part of my report note reader that the say judgement give in the case of  the become facias where execution be do and no writ return be give on great  reason because the levy of the debt be lawful and well do and the party  defendant can resist the sheriff to levy the moneyCro Elizabeth cro car hob  say cro Elizabeth salk show the effect of the authority which the sheriff have  by force of thefierifacias be execute the great prejudice that the defendant  who good and chattel be sell by the writ and process of law for the  satisfaction of his debt will have if the sheriff not return of the writ shall  cause a new execution to be sue forth against he and leave the defendant to  his action against the sheriff coke b if the sale of the good by force of the  writ shall by the nonreturn of the writ be wrongful then the sheriff will  never find buyer of the good of any defendant by force of any writ of  execution which will be inconvenient and a great delay of execution which be  the fruit and life of every suit and where the word of the wiit of become fac  be ita quod habeas denar c they be but word of command to the sheriff to make  return which if he do not he shall be emerced but yet the execution shall  stand in force c that the purchaser may justify under a be made fa whether the  proceed be regular or not Vid jeans v Wilkins Ves dyer pl Matthew man case Rep  b dr drury case   and if the sheriff sell a term under a writ of be made fa  which be afterward set aside for irregularity and the produce of the sale  direct to be return to the termor the termor can maintain ejectment to recover  his term against the vendee under the sheriff do v thorn I m S Vid send for  Eyre v Woodfine cro Elizabeth more but if the sheriff shall wrongful take the  good of another instead of those of the person against who the execution be  sue out he will acquire no title by his wrongful act and can therefore convey  no title to the vendee under he Farrant v Thompson b a if the term be extend  on elegit and judgement reverse for error the term shall be restore Hathursts  case dyer in marge Goodyere v ince cro James SC Brownl SC Yelv for the  delivery be to the plaintiff himself it be in law but a bare delivery in  specie which ought to be restore in specie again and do not alter the property  absolute but attend on the execution to be good or have as the execution be  but if there have be a sale by the sheriff to a stranger it have be otherwise  and accord to the case of Buckhurst v Mays cite vin ab error I pl so if  personal good be deliver to the party per the pure milk of reason price and  make even upon the reversal of the judgement he shall be restore to the good  themselves in the case of a outlawry the instant it be reverse it become mere  waste paper and the right of all the party be restore to the same situation as  if no outlawry have take place saint John college v Hurcot TR and Vid dr drury  case   and a termor upon the reversal of his outlawry shall be restore to his  term although it have be sell to the king Eyre v Woodfine cro Elizabeth c coke  report a er p it be resolve that after execution have by the queen the  revocation come too late for then the queen have have the effect and end of  the say assignment and that which be executory when it be assign be now  execute by lawful process of law and therefore can be revoke for when one have  a power of die pl b revocation yet if he suffer any thing to be lawful execute  by force of it as to that he can make any revocation as if a man make a letter  of attorney to make livery before execution he may revoke it but after  execution lawful have it be execute and can be revoke Vid vin ab countermand a  Vivion v wile Brownl d vide h a b Br error roll a h in detinue where the case  be in detinue of a statutemerchant the defendant pray garnishment the  plaintiff recover against the garnishee by erroneous judgement by force  whereof the defendant deliver the statute to the plaintiff who have execution  and afterward the garnishee reverse the judgement in a writ of error by which  he have restore all that be lose by that the execution shall not be avoid but  I conceive in such case he shall he belped by cudita complaint vide e if one  to who another be indebt be outlaw and he who be indebt pay the money to the  queen and afterward the outlawry be reverse now the creditor shall recover his  debt against he so if the good of a man Cr Elizabeth more roll die pl b outlaw  be sell by the sheriff on the writ of capias utlagatum c and afterward the  outlawry be reverse by writ of error the defendant shall have restitution of  his good but if the sheriff by force of a become facias roll die pl more jenk  cent Leon Leon godb Yelv Goldsb Cr Elizabeth Cr James king judge a c sell good  and afterward the judgement be reverse by writ of error the defendant shall  not have restitution of his good but the value of they for which they be sell  and there be two reason of this difference if the sale of the sheriff by force  of a become fac shall be avoid by subsequent reversal of the judgement there  will be no buyer and by consequence no execution do in the case of a become  facias the sheriff be compellable to make and levy the debt of the good c of  the defendant and therefore it be great reason that it shall stand but in the  case of capias utlagatum the sheriff or escheator be not compellable to sell  they but may keep they for the king coke report a er p use and therewith agree  Elizabeth dyer dyer pl d and vide Edward recompense in value coke a on a  voucher once lawful execute shall not be divest although the title of the  demandant to the land which he recover be afterward disaffirmed and evict it  be resolve that the revocation by three if no execution have be have have be  sufficient for if three Cr James roll e revoke two do it but if the word of  the clause of revocation have be by they joint or several then two of they can  not have do it for that have be neither joint nor several and therewith agree  h dyer h and so note a good   light b roll Yelv Noy hut roll Rep Inst h b   a  die pi roll Rep Bulstr f difference