
    *Chichester v. Boggess.
    Decided March 2, 1816.
    i. Writof Risvhl-Count in Behalf of Two Demandants— Plea against One —Effect.—If the count upon a writ oC right be in behalf of two demandants, a plea opposing' the claim of one, without mentioning that of the other, is defective: — and if, without any replication by the demandants, a verdict be found and judgment rendered in their favour, such judgment must be reversed, and all the proceedings, subsequent to the count, set aside.
    Upon a writ of supersedeas to a judgment in favour of Samuel Boggess and Henley Boggess demandants in a writ of right against Doddridge Pitt Chichester. The count was in the form prescribed by law, for a tenement containing 103 acres of land in the county of Fairfax, bounded, &c. The defendant by his attorney came and defended the “right of the said Samuel Boggess, when and where it behoved him, and all that concerned it, and whatsoever he ought to defend, and chiefly the tenement aforesaid with the appurtenances as of right, namely, &c., bounded, &c. ; put himself upon the assize, and prayed recognition to be made whetner he had greater right to hold the tenement aforesaid with the appurtenances, as he then held it, or the said Samuel to have it as he then demanded it.” To this plea, there was no replication ; yet a jury was impanelled, and found a special verdict, on which the court entered judgment for the demandants. The writ of super-sedeas was awarded, by this court, on the petition of the defendant.
   March 2d, 1816, the president pronounced the court’s opinion, as follows:

‘ ‘The court, without deciding on the merits of the cause, is of opinion that the proceedings therein, and judgment thereon, are erroneous, in this, that the plea is defective, as it does not answer the count as to the demandant, Henley Boggess; nor is there any replication to the plea. The judgment is therefore reversed with costs; all the proceedings subsequent to the count are set aside; and the cause is remanded for farther proceedings.  