
    King v. Lyman, Executor de son tort of General Lyman, Deceased.
    Intermeddling with the real estate or goods, etc. conveyed hy a fraudulent bill of sale of a deceased person, will not subject a man as executor de son tort.
    
    AotioN of account brought against tbe defendant as executor aforesaid.
    Tbe defendant plead — That be was not, nor ever bad been executor of tbe last will, etc. of said Pbinebas Lyman deceased, nor bad be ever administered as sucb. On wbicb tbe parties were at issue to tbe jury.
    Tbe plaintiff offered evidence to. prove that certain lands wbicb were tbe property of said deceased, at tbe time of bis death, bad been taken and disposed of by tbe defendant: Also, that tbe defendant bad taken and disposed of certain goods and chattels wbicb were held under a fraudulent bill of sale, given of them by tbe deceased in bis lifetime; wbicb evidence was objected to by tbe defendant.
   And

by the Court.

Tbe evidence is irrelevant, for no intermeddling with tbe real estate of tbe deceased will make the defendant an executor de son tort. Nor will bis bolding and disposing of goods and chattels, conveyed by tbe deceased in bis lifetime; although tbe bill of sale of them was fraudulent; for though tbe bill of sale may be fraudulent as to creditors, it is good and valid between tbe parties, and upon these principles all evidence of this kind was excluded.  