The finding was imperfect, and no judgment should have been entered upon it j but since it was entered, and there is no mode of reversing it, being a judgment of the superior court, though clearly erroneous, the defendants ex necesí-tate must he allowed to plead the same matter to this sci.fa. to> discharge their own goods, though they wouldnot.be entitled to such a plea now, had they not pleaded it to the first action — however, the plea now put in must relate to the teste of the process by which they were first brought into court, and must state a full administration and no assets at that time.
Executors of Emmett v. Stedman, 3 N.C. 15, 2 Hayw. 15 (1797)
Nov. 1797
·
North Carolina Superior Court
3 N.C. 15, 2 Hayw. 15
The Executors of Emmett vs. E. & W. Stedman.
npHIS was a sci.fa. against the defendants, to shew cause why the plaintiffs should not have execution de bonispropriis, to which they pleaded no assets; plene adminhtavit and in nisllo devastravit, to which there was a demurrer and joinder. The defendants were sued in the first action as executors, by a sci.fr. issued upon the death of their testator; and on coming into court upon the aci. fa, thev pleaded she guieuii issue, statutes cf *16limitations znáplene adminislravit, and the jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, affirming the assumpsit within three years, but found nothing as to the piche admmistravit.