
    John A. Meserve vs. Moses Norris.
    On the trial of an action of assumpsit, containing the usual money counts, a count upon an account annexed, and a special count upon a contract, the defendant, after the testimony is closed, and his counsel is arguing in the defence, canno require the plaintiff to elect a single count upon which to rest his case.
    On the trial of this action, which was before Mellen, J. in the court of common pleas, the testimony being closed and the counsel for the defendant addressing the jury in his defence, the defendant moved the court, that the plaintiff might then be required to state upon which of the several counts in his declaration, namely, the common money counts, a count on an account annexed, and a special count upon a contract, he intended to rely, and to elect a single count upon which to rest his case.
    The presiding judge overruled the motion; and the jury having returned a verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant alleged exceptions.
    The case was argued in writing, by F. W. Sawyer, for the defendant, and by C. G. Davis, for the plaintiff.
   By the court.

We see no ground for supporting these exceptions; and, appearing to the court to be frivolous, and intended for delay, they must be overruled, with double costs.

Exceptions overruled, and judgment on the verdict for the plaintiff, with double costs.  