Belknap county, plaintiff in a suit, is not properly described as "the inhabitants of the county of Belknap;" but the writ may be amended.
In assumpsit, the court may order an additional specification.
A county may recover, in assumpsit, of the clerk of the court of that county, its money, received by him and not accounted for, when he, in equity and good conscience, ought to account for it.
BINGHAM, J.
Belknap county is a body corporate, for the purpose of sueing and being sued. Gen. St., c. 22, s. 1. The plaintiff should have been described as the county of Belknap, and the amendment was properly allowed. Lebanon v. Griffin, 45 N.H. 558, 563; Flanders v. Stewartstown, 47 N.H. 549.
There was no error of law in the order of the court for an additional specification. Benedict v. Swain, 43 N.H. 33; Saunders v. Osgood, 46 N.H. 21.
Assumpsit lies. Wentworth v. Gove, 45 N.H. 160.
Case discharged.
FOSTER J., did not sit.