HURST and WIFE, Adm'r and Adm'x, vs. WILLIAMSON and WIFE

HURST and WIFE, Adm’r and Adm’x, vs. WILLIAMSON and WIFE. [SCIRE FACIAS TO REVIVE DECREE.] 1. Scire facias to revive decree; when not allowed. —A decree rendered against an administrator, on a settlement of his administration, cannot be revived by scire facias, in favor of a distributee of tire estate, against the personal representative of such administrator ; and such a proceeding will be quashed on appeal. Appeal from Henry Probate Court. A decree was rendered by tbe probate court of Henry county, on final settlement of tbe accounts of John Ward, as administrator de bonis non of Daniel Pitts, deceased, in favor of Jane Williamson, (one of the distributees of said estate,) and her husband, John Williamson, for the sum of 630 76-100 dollars, on 23d February, 1861. After the decree, Ward, the administrator, died, and a petition was filed by appellees against appellants, as administrator and administratrix of said Ward’s estate, for a scire facias to revive said decree against them, as representatives of said Ward; and the probate court, after notice, and upon a hearing, revived the said decree accordingly against said appellants.' From this decree of revivor they appealed, and assigned for- error the rendition of said decree of revivor. S. H. Dent, for appellants. W. C. Oates, for appellee. [MAJORITY — BYRD. J.] BYRD. J. There is no statute which authorizes the probate court to revive a decree rendered against an administrator on a settlement of his administration, in favor-of a distributee of the estate, against the personal representative of such administration. Whatever may be the remedy of such distributee, the law does not afford one by scire facias, to revive the decree against such personal representative. — Code, § 1930 ; Kirby, Adm’r, v. Anders, Guardian, &c., 26 Ala. 468. It results that the decree of revivor must be reversed, and a decree here rendered quashing the scire facias. The appellees must pay the costs of this court and the court below.