Responsa על בבא קמא 224:11

Q. In the dispute between A and B the court found that B owed A money. A demanded either immediate payment, or that B put up a bond to insure such payment. B, however, asked for the usual thirty days' interval in which to carry out the decision of the court. Are A's demands justified?
A. B is entitled to the thirty days' interval. The system of justice current in Israel is guaranty enough for A that after the thirty days will have passed the court will enforce its ruling. The reason for allowing a person only thirty days within which to comply with a court's decision, while, according to the Talmud, an adrakta is written after a ninety day interval, is this: An adrakta is written when the court finds no property from which to collect; but, if the property of the debtor is within reach, a judgment is enforced after the thirty days' interval has passed.
SOURCES: L. 267; P. 297.

Q. How much time is a defendant allowed to comply with the court's decision and pay the claimant, before further action is taken against him?
A. A defendant is allowed thirty days to comply with the decision of the court, if he is ordered to pay money to the claimant. If, however, the court's order is that he take an oath, he must do so at the next court session. Moreover, action is immediately taken against a defendant who admits that he has money, but refuses to comply with the court's decision.
SOURCES: Pr. 945; Cr. 103; Mord. B. M. 414.