
    John R. Clute, Appellant, v. Garrett A. Newkirk et al., Respondents.
    The continuance in possession of a grantor of real estate after the convey- ■ anee, while it may be a circumstance proper to be considered, in connection with other evidence tending to show a design to defraud creditors, does not of itself, warrant a finding as a legal conclusion, that the deed was fraudulent.
    (Argued June 22d, 1871;
    decided September 5th, 1871.)
    Action to set aside the conveyance of certain real estate deeded by one J. to defendant, N., and by him assigned to the other defendant for the benefit of his creditors, on the ground that the conveyance to. N. was fraudulent and void, as to the creditors of J. It was also claimed that the deed to N. was, in fact, a mortgage, and that J. had an interest subject to plaintiff’s judgment. Upon this question it was decided that there was a parol conditional agreement to re-convey, but no loan.
    
      E. F. Bullwrd, for appellant.
    
      S. W. Jackson, for respondents.
   Geovee, J.,

reads opinion for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.  