
    GARDNER against LANNING.
    OH CERTIORARI.
    A challenge that a juror has a suit for the like cause, against the challenger, is good.
    Lanning, the plaintiff below, brought an action before a justice to recover a sum of money of Gardner’s children who had been placed with Lanning by Gardner’s wife, in the absence of Gardner. The right of Lanning to recover this money, was the issue to be tried. At the trial, one Andrew Crockill was challenged as a juror, on the ground that he had [483] commenced an action before the same justice, for a cause of action involving the [f] same controversy; that is, to recover of Gardner for the maintenance of other children of Gardner under the same circumstances; but this challenge was overruled by the justice, and this was assigned for error, and clearly appeared from the record.
   By the Court.

This was' a lawful cause of challenge by the juror; and ought not to have been overruled by the justice. It is plain the juror had a bias on his mind, and could not stand indifferent between the parties.

Judgment reversed.  