
    [150] [*] PRICE against SMOCK.
    OH CERTIORARI.
    Credits to reduce the plaintiff’s account to one hundred dollars, must be specifically set out.
    The state of demand in this case, was an account containing various items, in all amounting to $138.95, at the bottom of which, was the following note: “ Legal credits from the defendant, to be deducted.” It was contended, on the part of the plaintiff in eertiorarij who was the defendant before the justice, that the state of demand exceeded the jurisdiction of the court below; that this was apparent on the face of the demand; and that the words noted at the bottom, were not sufficient to remove the objection.
   By the Court.

— The credits, in order to reduce the demand to the sum, of which the justice has jurisdiction, ought to be specifically set out. .In the present case the amownt of the credits to be deducted is not mentioned; it, therefore, does not appear that they will reduce the sum demanded, within the justice’s jurisdiction; from the face of the demand, then, it appears, that it exceeded the sum, of which the justice had jurisdiction; and for this cause, judgment must be reversed. There were several other reasons assigned [*] for the reversal of this judgment, but the court reversing on the first reason, gave no opinion on the others.

Wall, attorney for plaintiff.

Cited in Farley v. McIntire, 1 Gr. 190; Howell v. Burnet, Spenc. 265. 
      
       Sic post, *528, 551, 661. 1 South. 104, 220. 4 Halst. 118.
      
     