
    Stewart against Speer.
    A verdict in ejectment “for the plaintiff, for one hundred and fifty acres, part of the land claimed in the writ, and not guilty as to the residue,” without designating the part found, is bad for uncertainty, and a judgment on it is erroneous.
    ERROR to the common pleas of York county.
    This was an action of ejectment by James H. Speer against James H. Stewart, for two hundred acres of land. The jury found “ for the plaintiff one hundred and fifty acres, part of the land claimed in the writ, and not guilty as to the residue,” upon which judgment was rendered. This was the only error relied upon.
    
      Lewis, for plaintiff in error,
    cited, 10 Serg. & Rawle 153.
    
      Ramsay and R. Fisher, for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam.

It is impossible to sustain this verdict. It is for one hundred and fifty acres, part of the land in dispute, without referenee or allusion to any thing to designate the land recovered, or even to intimate the quarter or side from which it was intended to be taken. It is, therefore, incurably uncertain.

Judgment reversed and a venire de novo awarded.  