
    ADAM STEINBROOK against JACOB STEINBROOK.
    IN ERROR,
    Upon a judgment, entered, on a special verdict, being reversed by the Supreme Court, and sent ba,ck to b.e more particularly stated, the cause may be arbitrated by either party.
    Error to the common pleas of Crawford county.
    This was an action of ejectment, for a tract of land, brought by Jacob Steinbrook against Jldam Steinbrook. A jury having been sworn and the testimony heard, the Court delivered their charge to the jury, which the parties then agreed should be considered in the nature of a special verdict. The Court entered a judgment for t.he defendant. The plaintiff sued out a writ of error from the Supreme Court. The judgment was then “reversed, ,a venire de novo awarded, and record remitted, to be more fully stated. ”
    When the cause -went back, the plaintiff entered a rule to choose arbitrators^ the arbitrators met, and made a report in favour of the plaintiff; .from which .there was no appeal. The defendant made a motion at the next .term to strike off the rule of reference, and all subsequent proceedings. .Upon, argument, the Court (Ship-pen, President,) -refused to do this. , The defendant then took out a writ of error..
    
      8. B. Foster for plaintiff in error,
    Contended., that the situation of this case was such, that it could not be referred to abitrators. That there being a special verdict agreed to, nothing could be done in the Court below, but to amend the same, according to the order of the Supreme Court j and which arbitrators could not and did not do.
    
      Derricks on and Selden for defendant in error,
    stopped by the Court..
   Judgment affirmed.  