ccix KIGHTLEY and KIGHTLEYS case debt by Eustace Kightley against Charles  Kightley executor of the last will of Francis Kightley the defendant plead  that they have full administer the case be this Francis Kightley make the  defendant his executor who be within age Administration be commit to another  until they come of full age and after they be of full age the jury find that  in the hand of the administrator to be good debt is owed testator amount to  the value of l to which administrator the executor do release at their full  age all manner of demand and if that release be asset in the hand of the  executor be the question puckering sergeant argue it be not asset for a  release of a thing which be not asset in the hand of a executor can be asset  and thin S in action before they come in possession can be asset but a gift of  good in possession be asset and there be a difference betwixt a certain thing  release and a thing incertain of a certain it be asset for by such mean he  have give a thing which be asset but contrary of a incertain and this  difference be prove by Leonard e execute where it be hold that if executor  release to the debtor he shall account for such sum before the ordinary by  parn but true say he shall not account the whole court be against puckering  and Anderson say it be a clear case that this release be asset for he have  thereby give away that which may have be asset and the law do intend that when  he release be have recompense and satisfaction from the party to who the  release be make and it be not requisite that every asset be a thing in  possession or in the hand of the testator for a thing may be asset which never  be in the hand of a testator as money for land or other good sell so if they  come by reason of another thing which be in the testator hand as the increase  of good by the executor in their hand by merchandising with the good of the  testator or good purchase by the villain of the testator after his death shall  be asset so money receive by the executor of the bailiff of the testator after  his death shall be say asset Windam justice so it be if the testator have  sheep corn or swine and die and they have young lamb big or calf they be asset  for the reason aforesaid and he agree that the release be asset and he say it  have be so adjudge and he deny the difference take by puckering periam agree  with the rest in all and also deny the difference and he say the incertainty  must be such that the same can be prove to the court or unto a jury that the  thing release may not by possibility have be asset for if trespass be do to  the testator by take his good and he die and the executor release all action  the same be asset because it may be prove to the jury that have they not  release but bring their action of trespass de good carry away in vita testator  that they may have recover damage which shall have satisfy the debt or legacy  of the testator and therefore it shall be asset and yet the thing recover can  be in the testator or a thing in possession or certain in the hand of the  executor with who Rhodes agree and periam conceive that such administrator  make durante those inferior in rank lifetime of the executor can not by our  law neither sue or be sue for as he conceive the infant be the executor and a  infant executor may either sue or be sue and may release if there be a  sufficient consideration give he wherefore he say if a administrator Leonard  er p