
    *HURON COUNTY,
    AUGUST TERM, 1833.
    JUDGES — -WRIGHT AND WOOD.
    CARTER, SUPERVISOR, v. HAWLEY AND OTHERS.
    Error — officers—supervisors—costs divided.
    Officers prosecuting for penalties, are not liable for costs; and if a judgment is rendered against them for costs in such case, it is error.
    Where the judgment of the court is reversed in part and affirmed in part, the costs are equally divided.
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas. The plaintiff, as supervisor of roads, brought suit in the Common Pleas to recover a penalty for obstructing the road; the court gave judgment against him, and for costs.
    
      E. Andrews for the plaintiff in error.
    
      T. B. Sturges contra.
   WRIGHT, J.

By the practice act of 1824 (22 O. L. 63), officers prosecuting for penalties are exonerated from liability for costs. The same provision is in the practice act of 1831, sect. 61; 29 O. L. 69. The judgment for costs, therefore, is erroneous, and this court so decided in Bittle v. Hay 5 O. 270. The defendant had a. right to a judgment to bar a future recovery, but he could not legally recover costs.

The judgment is reversed as to costs, and affirmed as to the residue. The costs in error, under our statute, providing for such cases, must be equally divided between the parties; 29 O. L. 18.  