County v. Clark

60 N.H. 209
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided December 5, 1880·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Clark, J.

The examination of the accounts of the defendant as clerk of the court, by the presiding justice, was the performance of a duty imposed by statute, and the order of approval was a determination of the claims considered and allowed, in the nature of a judgment, and is a bar to this action. The statute requiring an adjustment of the defendant’s account by the court does not give *210 or leave to either of these parties an appeal from that adjustment by a suit at law. Supervisors v. Briggs, 2 Hill 135—S. C ., 2 Denio 26. If the settlement is erroneous, it may be reopened and corrected by proper proceedings, — by simple motion to the court and notice to the defendant; and this action may be continued in the trial term without costs to await the result. Northumberland v. Cob leigh, 59 N. H. 250, 256.

Case discharged.

' Foster, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

County v. Clark, 60 N.H. 209 (N.H. 1880).

60 N.H. 209 (County v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Owen v. Weston
4 A. 801 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1885)