
    [504] [†] SHOEMAKER against COVENHOVEN.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    Action for a malicious suit, lies not for two complaints before a grand jury.
    Covenhoven brought the action before the justice on the following state of demand:
    Whereas, the said John Shoemaker did maliciously enter a complaint against me. in the Term of August, 1806, before the grand jury of the county of Hunterdon, and I was acquitted by the said grand jury; said Shoemaker also entered a complaint against me maliciously, in the Term of October following, in consequence an indictment was found against me, to my damage forty-five dollars and twenty-five cents, as will appear by my account, stating an amount for loss of time, expenses, witnesses and counsel fee.
    This was tried by the justice without a jury, in the absence of the defendant, on which he rendered judgment for the plaintiff below, for $37.25.
   By the Court.

The action below was brought for a malicious prosecution; and the facts disclosed in the state of demand are, that the defendant below made a complaint to the grand jury against the plaintiff below, and that the grand jury did not then find a bill; that at the next court-lie renewed the complaint before another grand jury, and that grand jury found a bill of indictment against the plaintiff below, whereby he was put to costs. We are clear that an action cannot be maintained on these facts.

Judgment reversed.  