Money paid in satisfaction of a judgment subsequently reversed may be recovered from the judgment creditor, or, in case he was but a nominal plaintiff, from the person in whose interest the action was brought;1 but persons to whom the judgment creditor has paid over the money in discharge of his debts are not liable.2 It has been said that an action will lie against the attorney for the judgment creditor in case he receives and retains the money on behalf of his client,3 but this is doubtful.4 Certainly, if the attorney or other agent to whom the money is paid retains it, with the consent of his principal, in satisfaction of a debt owing from such principal, or otherwise applies it in accordance with the principal's directions, he cannot be held.5

1 See Haebler v. Myers, 1892, 132 N. Y. 363, 367; 30 N. E. 963; 15 L. R. A. 588; 28 Am. St. Rep. 589.

2 Clark v. Pinney, 1826, 6 Cow. (N. Y.) 298; Haebler v. Myers, 1892, 132 N. Y. 363; 30 N. E. 963; 15 L. R. A. 588; 28 Am. St. Rep. 589.

3 Duncan v. Kirkpatrick, 1825, 13 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 292.

4 Stevens v. Fitch, 1846, 11 Metc. (Mass.) 248; Mann v. AEtna Ins. Co., 1875, 38 Wis. 114.

5 Williams v. Simmons, 1853, 22 Ala. 425; Kalmbach v. Foote, 1890, 79 Mich. 236; 44 N. W. 603.

6Ritchie v. Carter, 1901, 89 Mo. App. 290; Garr v. Martin, 1859, 20 N. Y. 306.

7 Lewis v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 1897, 97 Wis. 368; 72 N. W. 976. And see Duncan v. Ware's Extrs., 1833, 5 Stew. & P. (Ala.) 119; 24 Am. Dec. 772; McElwee v. Wilce, 1898, 80 III. App. 338. But see First Nat. Bank v. Millon, 1881, 45 Mich. 413; 8 N. W. 80.

Whoever is sued, it must appear that the money was actually received by him or by his agent.6 Proof that the money sought to be recovered was paid to the sheriff is not enough.