Majority
p. 285Irwin vs. Deyo.
Headnote
Where a dee¿ined11 °ten counts, two for malicious prosecution, slanderf'^and ther® "'as no proot m support of the two court^dil rected that in the taxation no allowance sh°uld , be made for those counts, and the1 counts‘ in slandershould So they diwhnlses’ fees should be taxed for but ten witnesses, where forty in fact attended in support of the plaintiff’s general character.Motion for retaxation. The declaration in this case contained ten counts, two for malicious prosecution, and eight in slander; four of the last were laid with a colloquium, and . _ 1 four without. Forty witnesses attended to support the plaintiff’s general character, only two of whom were sworn on the trial. There was no proof in support of the counts for a ma-1 1 x licaras prosecution. The taxing officer allowed for all the counts in the declaration, and for the attendance of all the witnesses.
The Court ordered a retaxation, and directed that an al- ... lowance should be made for but four counts m slander, two with, and two without a colloquium, and nothing for the counts for malicious prosecution. They also directed that fees should be taxed for but ten witnesses attending in support of the plaintiff’s general character.