Execution may issue after the judgment has ceased to be a lien. Yeager v. Wright, 112 Ind. 230. If the debtor conveys his lands and dies before execution issues, the judgment must be enforced by suit. Decker v. Gilbert, 80 Ind. 107. 627. (615.) Review of, by whom-Exception.-665. Any person who is a party to any judgment, or the heirs, devisees, or personal representatives of a deceased party, may file in the court where such judgment is rendered a complaint for a review of the proceedings and judgment. Any person under legal disabilities may file such a complaint at any time within one year after the disability is removed. But no complaint shall be filed for a review of a judgment of divorce. It is only parties or privies who can maintain an action to review a judgment. Cassel v. Case, 14 Ind. 393; Owen v. Cooper, 46 Ind. 524. The heirs or devisees of a party may prosecute an action of review. Webster v. Maiden, 41 Ind. 124. As a general rule all of the parties to the original proceeding should be parties to an action of review. Douglay v. Davis, 45 Ind. 493. Joint sureties may unite in an action of review. Burns v. Singer Co., 87 Ind. 541. The complaint for a review must set forth a complete record of the case, or so much thereof as is necessary to fully present the error complained of. McDade v. McDade, 29 Ind. 340; Comer v. Himes, 58 Ind. 573; Meharry v. Meharry, 59 Ind. 257; Whitehall v. Crawford, 67 Ind. 84; Stevens v. City, 76 Ind. 498; Funk v. Davis, 103 Ind. 281. Proceedings by a guardian to sell lands can not be reviewed. Davidson v. Lindsay, 16 Ind. 186. Judgments in actions for partition may be reviewed. Lucas v. Peters, 45 Ind. 313. Minors not served with process, and not appearing by guardian or in person, to partition proceedings, may not have the proceedings reviewed without showing cause. Brown v. Keyser, 53 Ind. 85. Minors can not have partition proceedings reviewed until after arriving of age. Guardians can not maintain such action. Bundy v. Hall, 60 Ind. 177. Proceedings relating to the settlement of decedents' estates can not be reviewed. McCurdy v. Love, 97 Ind. 62. Nor can judgments in criminal actions be reviewed. Frazier v. State, 106 Ind. 562. Nor decrees and proceedings in divorce cases. Willman v. Willman, 57 Ind. 500; Earle v. Earle, 91 Ind. 27. Married women are not under such disabilities as extends the time for reviewing judgments. Rosa v. Prather, 103 Ind. 191. Persons under legal disabilities have the time extended to bring proceedings for review. Harlen v. Watson, 63 Ind. 143; Alexander v. Daugherty, 69 Ind. 388. 628. (616.) For what had-Limit of filing.-666. The complaint may be filed for any error of law appearing in the proceedings and judgment, within one year; or for material new matter, discovered since the rendition thereof, within three years; or for both causes, within one year after the rendition of the judgment, and without leave of court. The error of law must be apparent on the face of the record, and for which the judgment would be reversed on appeal. Richardson v. Howk, 45 Ind. 451; Rice v. Turner, 72 Ind. 559; American Co. v. Gibson, 104 Ind. 336; Baker v. Ludlam, 118 Ind. 87. As a general rule errors of law must have been excepted to in order to be cause for review. Train v. Gridley, 36 Ind. 241; Davidson v. King, 51 Ind. 224; Goar v. Cravens, 57 Ind. 365. If a party fails to object to errors committed when he has an opportunity to do so, such errors will be considered as waived. Preston v. Sandford, 21 Ind. 156; American Co. v. Gibson, 104 Ind. 336. If the errors were not saved by a motion for a new trial, or bill of exceptions, when necessary, a review can not be had. Boyd v. Fitch, 71 Ind. 306. When a judgment is taken by default a review can be had though no exception was taken. Berkshire v. Young, 45 Ind. 461. If a default is improperly taken a review may be had. Mitchell v. McCorkle, 69 Ind. 184. Want of jurisdiction over the subject-matter, or want of facts to constitute a complaint, are causes for review without objection or exception. Davis v. Perry, 41 Ind. 305; Anderson v. Anderson, 65 Ind. 196. Want of jurisdiction over the person is cause for review. Ind. 466; State, ex rel., v. Ennis, 74 Ind. 17. McCormack v. Bank, 53 Making a judgment draw an illegal rate of interest is cause for a review. Davidson r. King, 49 Ind. 338. If a will is improperly corrected the judgment may be reviewed. Funk v. Davis, 103 Ind. 281. If a complaint shows that a married woman is not personally liable the judgment may be reviewed. Emmett v. Yandes, 60 Ind. 548; Hinsey v. Feeley, 62 Ind. 85. Legal disability at the time of rendition of a judgment is no cause for review. Alexander v. Daugherty, 69 Ind. 388; Woods v. Brown, 93 Ind. 164. A review can not be had of a judgment entered by agreement. Collins v. Rose, 59 Ind. 33. No review can be had of an interlocutory order not appealable. Cravens v. Chambers, 69 Ind. 84. The overruling of a demurrer to a complaint for a review, on account of error of law, has the effect of setting the judgment aside. Richardson v. Howk, 45 Ind. 451; Leech r. Perry, 77 Ind. 422. New matter must consist of facts, and not mere evidence of facts. Hall v. Palmer, 18 Ind. 5; Nelson v. Johnson, 18 Ind. 329. New matter means more than newly discovered evidence. Webster v. Maiden, 41 Ind. 124; Francis v. Davis, 69 Ind. 452. Barnes v. Dewey, 58 Ind. 418. Discovery of the alteration of a written instrument may constitute new matter. Tate 7. Fletcher, 77 Ind. 102. Misrepresentations of an attorney may constitute new matter. Dippel v. Schicketanz, 100 Ind. 376. It should appear that the new matter would entitle the party to a different judgment. Simpkins e. Wilson, 11 Ind. 541; Francis v. Davis, 69 Ind. 452. The new matter named in this section does not embrace new matter of law, such as a curative statute enacted after the rendition of the judgment. Worley v. Ellettsville, 60 Ind. 7. If a complaint for review on account of new matter is held good on demurrer, the defendant should answer. Richardson v. Howk, 45 Ind. 451. In a proceeding to review, a cross-complaint in review is competent. Harlen v. WatSon, 63 Ind. 143. The application must be filed within the time fixed by the statute. 193 Ind. 191. Rosa v. Prather, Non-residents have no longer time than others to commence an action for review. Rosa v. Prather, 103 Ind. 191. The legislature may change the time for bringing actions for review at will. Rupert r. Martz, 116 Ind. 72. A demurrer to the complaint will not raise the question of the statute of limitations. Funk v. Davis, 103 Ind. 281; Whitehall v. Crawford, 67 Ind. 84. Fraud in obtaining a judgment is no cause for a review, but courts may set such judgment aside. Nealis v. Dicks, 72 Ind. 374; Hogg v. Link, 90 Ind. 346; Earle v. Earle, 91 Ind. 27. 629. (617.) For new matter-Verified-Contents.-667. When the complaint for a review is filed for new matter discovered since the rendition of the judgment, it shall be verified by the complainant, and show that the new matter could not have been discovered before judgment by reasonable diligence, and that the complaint is filed without delay after the discovery. If the complaint for review for new matter is verified the affidavit of a witness as to the matter should not be filed. Hill v. Roach, 72 Ind. 57. The complaint must show by facts that the new matter could not have been discovered by diligence before the rendition of the judgment. Barnes v. Dewey, 58 Ind. 418; Whitehall v. Crawford, 67 Ind. 84; Hill v. Roach, 72 Ind. 57; Debolt v. Debolt, 86 Ind. 521; McCauley v. Murdock, 97 Ind. 229. The complaint must be filed without delay after discovery of the new matter. Collins v. Rose, 59 Ind. 33; Francis v. Davis, 69 Ind. 452. 630. (618.) Stay-Bond.-668. At any time after filing the complaint, and before the final hearing, the court may, upon application of the plaintiff, stay all further proceedings on the judgment. When proceedings are stayed, the court shall direct bond and surety to be given, as in cases of appeal. 631. (619.) Notice of filing-Issue.-669. The defendant shall be notified of the filing of such complaint, and the parties shall proceed to form issues of law and fact as in other cases. 632. (620.) Judgment-Costs.-670. Upon the hearing, the court may reverse or affirm the judgment in whole or in part, or modify the same, as the justice of the case may require, and award costs according to the rule prescribed for the awarding of costs in the supreme court, on appeal. If a judgment reviewed is too large, it should be modified. Francis v. Davis, 69 Ind. 452. The judgment may be affirmed or reversed, in whole or in part, or modified. Alsop v. Wiley, 17 Ind. 452. If a demurrer to a complaint for review for error of law is overruled, final judgment reversing the judgment may be rendered. Richardson v. Howk, 45 Ind. 451; Leech v. Perry, 77 Ind. 422. The reversal of a judgment leaves the cause to proceed as an original action. Leech v. Perry, 77 Ind. 422. If the judgment reviewed is affirmed or reversed, the action for review is at an end, and an appeal will lie. Brown v. Keyser, 53 Ind. 85; Keepfer v. Force, 86 Ind. 81. If an appeal would not lie from the original judgment, no appeal lies from the judgment of review. Klebar v. Town, 80 Ind. 95. same. Parties can not appeal from a judgment and prosecute proceedings to review the The adoption of one remedy is a waiver of the other. Dunkle v. Elston, 71 Ind. 585; Klebar v. Town, 80 Ind. 95; Traders' Co. v. Carpenter, 85 Ind. 350; Buscher v. Knapp, 107 Ind. 340. If an appeal is taken for error of law it does not bar a review for new matter. Hill v. Roach, 72 Ind. 57. The supreme court will not reverse a judgment granting a review unless it appears that great injustice has been done. Hornady v. Shields, 119 Ind. 201; Hoppes v. Hoppes, 123 Ind. 397. A second complaint in review is not allowable. Coen v. Funk, 26 Ind. 289; Ratliff v. Baldwin, 29 Ind. 16. A complaint in review may be amended. Foster v. Potter, 24 Ind. 363. A review will not lie in ex parte proceedings. Davidson v. Lindsay, 16 Ind. 186; Williams v. Williams, 18 Ind. 345; Barnes v. State, 28 Ind. 82. 633. (621.) Death of judgment debtor-Heirs, etc., when to show cause.-724. In case of the death of any judgment debtor, the heirs, devisees, or legatees of such debtor, or the tenant of real property owned by him and affected by the judgment, and the personal representatives of the decedent, may, after the expiration of one year from the time of granting letters testamentary or of administration upon the estate of the decedent, be summoned to show cause why the judgment should not be enforced against the estate of the judgment debtor in their hands respectively. Where a sole defendant dies after judgment and before execution, an execution can not issue without revivor. Louden v. Day, 6 Ind. 7. This is applicable to ejectment. State v. Michaels, 8 Blkf. 436. The words "tenant of real property," apply only to persons who hold by lease as tenants. Hill v. Sutton, 47 Ind. 592. A tenant can not object to the application because it fails to show whether or not there are assets in the hands of the administrator. Cox v. Stout, 85 Ind. 422. The judgment should be enforced before the lien expires. Jones v. Detchon, 91 Ind. 154. The application can not be made until the expiration of a year after letters testamentary or administration have been granted. Lovering v. King, 97 Ind. 130. The statute contemplates the filing of pleadings and the formation of issues as in ordinary actions. Faulkner v. Larrabee, 76 Ind. 154. The complaint should show what property came into the hands of the defendant. Faulkner v. Larrabee, 76 Ind. 154. If the judgment defendant conveys lands and dies before issuing of execution, the lien must be enforced by suit. Decker v. Gilbert, 80 Ind. 107. 634. (622.) Affidavit by judgment creditor.-725. The judgment creditor, his representatives or attorney, shall file an affidavit that the judgment has not been satisfied, to his knowledge, or information. and belief, and shall specify the amount due thereon, and the property sought to be charged. 635. (623.) Service of summons-Issue-Trial-Order.—726. A summons shall be issued, served, and returned, or publication may be made, as in other cases; issues shall be formed, and be tried as in an original suit; and the court shall order the property of the decedent in the hands of the heirs, devisees, or legatees, or in the hands of the tenant of real property, to be sold to pay the judgment and costs in the manner required by the judgment. 636. (624.) Death of one joint judgment debtor-Estate liable.727. When two or more persons shall be jointly liable on a contract . or judgment, and either of them shall die, his estate, executors, and administrators shall be liable for the failure to perform the contract and for the payment of the judgment, to the same extent and in the same manner as if such contract or judgment were joint and several. The death of one maker of a joint contract renders the same joint and several. Greathouse v. Kline, 93 Ind. 598 SEC. 637. Exception defined. ARTICLE 25.-APPEAL. 638. Time of excepting-Bill—Proviso. 640. Exception on record, how noted. 650. Appeal during term-Stay-Bond- 651. Failure to file record-ExecutionProviso. 652. Appeal after term-Notice-Filing. 654. Bond, how approved-Stay. 657. Executors-Bond not required. 660. Length of stay. 661. Transcript for appeal. 662. Transcript-Certificate -When evidence omitted. 663. Publication against non-resident. SEC. 664. When appeal stands for trial. 667. Assignment of errors-Answer. 671. One judge interested: others divided 672. Reversal-Remanding for new trial -Instructions. 673. Judgment of supreme court-Damages. 674. Notice to clerk below-Petition for rehearing. 675. Death, no effect after submission. 676. Costs. 677. Fee for transcript, etc. 678. Execution from supreme court-Return. 637. (625.) Exception defined.-402. An exception is an objection taken to a decision of the court upon a matter of law. 638. (626.) Time of excepting-Bill-Proviso.-403. The party objecting to the decision must except at the time the decision is made; but time may be given to reduce the exception to writing, but not beyond the term, unless by special leave of the court. It shall not be necessary to copy a written instrument or documentary evidence into a bill of exceptions, but it shall be sufficient to refer to such evidence, if its appropriate place be designated by the words "here insert:" Provided, That if a motion for a new trial shall be filed in a |