King v. Lyman
1 Root 104
Opinion
And
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. Lyman, 1 Root 104 (Colo. Ct. App. 1785).
1 Root 104 (King v. Lyman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Claussen v. Lafrenz
4 Greene 224 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1854)
O'Reilly v. Hendricks
10 Miss. 388 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1844)