#### 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.

Per curiam.

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.