Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Nulla bona is a Latin legal term meaning "no goods". A sheriff writes this when he can find no property to seize to pay off a court judgment. [1] Synonymous with return nulla bona, it denotes the return of a writ of execution signifying that the officer made a strict and diligent search but was unable to find any property of the defendant liable to seizure under the writ, whereof to make a levy.
A writ of execution (also known as an execution) is a court order granted to put in force a judgment of possession obtained by a plaintiff from a court. [1] When issuing a writ of execution, a court typically will order a sheriff or other similar official to take possession of property owned by a judgment debtor.
A fieri facias, usually abbreviated fi. fa. (Latin for that you cause to be made), is a writ of execution after judgment obtained in a legal action for debt or damages for the sheriff to levy on goods of the judgment debtor. [1] [2] The term is used in English law for such a writ issued in the High Court.
Bahio amovendo, a writ to remove a bailiff from his office for want of sufficient land in his bailiwick. [1]Beaupleader [3]; Besayle is a writ directed to the sheriff, in case of an abatement or disseisin, to summon a jury to view the land in question, and to recognise whether the great grandfather died seised of the premises, and whether the demandant be his next heir.
(1)(a) No writ of execution against the immovable property of any judgment debtor shall issue until— (i) a return shall have been made of any process which may have been issued against the movable property of the judgment debtor from which it appears that the said person has not sufficient movable property to satisfy the writ; or
A charging order, in English law, is an order obtained from a court or judge by a judgment creditor, by which the property of the judgment debtor in any stocks or funds or shares in a limited liability company or land stands charged with the payment of the amount for which judgment shall have been recovered, with interest and costs.
Despite the ongoing drip of Nazi-looted artworks being returned to their rightful owners (or their descendants), 2024 was a frustrating year for many of the affected families.
The mere claim by the distrainor that he had a right to the chattels distrained was a technicality that ended the action in replevin. It was then necessary to re-file using a new writ invented in the early fourteenth century, called the writ de proprietate probanda – a writ "concerning the proof of ownership". [26] [24]