the body of rules, whether of practice or of pleading, whereby rights are effectuated through the successful application of the proper remedies. It is also generally distinguished from the law of evidence. Brown. See Kring v. Missouri, 107 U. S. 221, 2 Sup. Ct. 443, 27 L. Ed. 506; Cochran v. Ward, 5 Ind. App. 89, 29 N. DB. 795, 31 N. EB. 581, 51 Am. St. Rep. 229. - The law of procedure is what is now commonly termed by jurists “adjective law,” (q. v.) In a general sense, the form and manner of conducting juridical business before a court or judicial officer; regular and orderly progress in form of law; including all possible steps in an action from its cominencement to the execution of judgment. In a more particular sense, any application to a court of justice, however made, for aid in the enforcement of rights, for relief, for redress of injuries, for damages, or for any remedial object. Erwin v. U. S. (D. C.) 37 Fed. 488, 2 L. R. A. 229; People v. Raymond, 186 Ill. 407, 57 N. E. 1066; Morewood v. Hollister, 6 N. Y. 309; Uhe v. Raitlway Co., 3 S. D. 563, 54 N. W. 601; State v. Gordon, 8 Wash. 488, 36 Pac. 498. —Collateral proceeding. One in which the articular question may arise or be involved incidentally, but which is not instituted for the very purpose of deciding such question; as in the rule that a judgment cannot be attacked, or a corporation’s right to exist be questioned, in any collateral proceeding. Peyton v. Peyton, 2S Wash. 278, 68 Pac. 757; Peoria & P. U. R. Co, v. Peoria & F. R. Co., 105 Ill. 116.—Exeoutory proceeding. In the law of Louisiana, a proceeding which is resorted to in the following ‘cases: When the creditor's right arises from an act importing a confession of judgiment, and which contains a privilege or mortor when the creditor demands the execution of a judgment which has been rendered by a tribunal different from that within whose jurisdiction the execution is sought. Code Prac. La. art. 732.—Legal proceedings. This term includes all proceedings authorized or sanctioned by law, and brought or instituted in a court of justice or legal tribunal, for the acquiring of a right or the enforcement of a remedy. Griem v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 99 Wis. 530, 75 N. W. 67; In re Emslie (D. C.) 98 Fed. 720; Id., 102 Fed. 293, 42 C. C. A. 350; Mack v. Campau, 69 Vt. 558, 38 Atl. 149, 69 Am. St. Rep. 948. —Special proceeding. This phrase has been used in the New York and other codes of procedure as a generic term for all civil remedies which are not ordinary actions. Code Proc. N. Y. § 3—Summary proceeding. Any proceeding by which a controversy is settled, case disposed of, or trial conducted, in a prompt and simple manner, without the afd of a jury, without presentment or indictment, or in other respects out of the regular course of the common law. In procedure, proceedings are said to be summary when they are short and simple in comparison with regular proceedings; 6. ¢., in comparison with the proceedings which alone would have been applicable, either in the same or analogous cases, if summary proceedings had not been available. Sweet. And see Phillips v. Phillips, 8 N. J. Law, 122; Govan v. Jackson, 32 Ark. 557; Western & A. R. Co. v. Atlanta, 113 Ga. 537, 38 S. EB. 906, 54 ‘L. R. A. 802.—Supplementary proceeding. A separate proceeding in an original action, in which the court where the action’is pending is called upon to exercise its jurisdiction in ai of the judgment in the action. Bryant v. Bank of California (Cal.) 7 Pac. 180. In a more particular sense, a proceeding in aid of execution, authorized by statute In some states in cases where no leviable property of the judgment debtor is found. It is a statutory equiyalent in actions at law of the creditor's bill in uity, and in states where law and equity are blended, is provided as a substitute therefor. In this proceeding the judgment debtor is summoned to appear before the court (or a referee or examiner) and submit to an oral examination touching all his property and effects, and if property subject to execution and in his possession or control is thus discovered, he is ordered to deliver it up, or a receiver may be appointed. See In re Burrows, 33 Kan. 675, 7 Pac. 148; Eikerberry v. Edwards, 67 Iowa, 619, 25 N. W. 832, 56 Am. Rep. 360.