Case Name: Holt & a. v. Downs & a.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1876-12
Citations: 58 N.H. 28
Docket Number: 
Parties: Holt & a. v. Downs & a.
Judges: Bingham, J., did not sit.
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 28–28

Head Matter:
Holt & a. v. Downs & a.
When a writ, signed and issued by the clerk of one county, is made returnable and entered in another county, the change of the name of the county in the margin, from the former to the latter, at the time the declaration is inserted, is not a cause for quashing the writ.
Motion, to quash a writ signed and issued by the clerk of Merrimack, and made returnable and entered in Hillsborough. The ground of the motion was, that when the blank was filled, “ Merrimack” in the margin was erased, and “ Hillsborough” inserted.
E. M. Smith, for the defendants.
Albin, for the plaintiffs.

Opinion:
Doe, C. J.
If the alteration is a defect, it is one of form only. Reynolds \. Eamrell, 19 N. H. 394 ; Berry v. Osborn, 28 N. H. 279.
Motion denied.
Bingham, J., did not sit.