
    Manhattan Company v. Osgood and others, 3 Cow. 612.
    In S. Ct. 15 J. R. 162.
    
      Evidence; Fraudulent Conveyance; Judgment against Executors.
    
    The Supreme Court held in this case, that the conveyance, merely voluntary, by a grantor who was at the time insolvent, was void, as respects creditors, and the land conveyed, assets in the hands of the heirs or devisees of the residuum of the estate ; that, in an action by the creditor against the heirs or devisees, where some of them were, also, the executors of the grantor, and had, as executors, petitioned the surrogate for leave to sell the real estate of the grantor, on account of an alleged deficiency of personal assets; their petition was good evidence against all the defendants to show the insolvency of the grantor, so as to avoid the conveyance and repel their plea of riens per descent.
    
    The Court of Errors held, 1. That the acts or admission of the executors were not evidence against heirs or devisees. 2. That a judgment against the executors, is not evidence against the heirs ; but that to make the confessions of one man evidence against another, they must have a joint interest in possession, and that the confession of a grantor or of his executors, after the grants, are not admissible in evidence to prejudice the rights of the grantee.
   Judgment reversed.

33ra See Wood v. Genet, &c., post, which grew out of this decision.  