 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Appeal of First Student, Inc. (N.H. Dep't of Empl. Sec.), No. 2005-384,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, June 27, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When the Department of Employment Security issued a determination of liability to an LLC, it was final and conclusive under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 282-A:95. The Department had sufficient information before it as to the relationship between the LLC and a corporation to properly assess the liability of the LLC under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 282-A:94.
|
|||||
| State v. Murray, No. 2005-304,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, June 27, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A retrial did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause or N.H. Const. pt. I, art. 16 because the trial court properly found that the prosecutor had not intentionally provoked a mistrial by eliciting testimony about an inadmissible statement. The record did not demonstrate that the State had any tactical reason to provoke a mistrial.
|
|||||
| Sullivan v. Town of Hampton Bd. of Selectmen, No. 2005-464,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, June 27, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 32:10(I) gave selectmen discretionary authority to transfer funds within a previously adopted budget as unplanned needs arose, and an amendment to N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:13 did not restrict this authority. Failure to pass an operating budget was a sufficient change in circumstances to justify the use of the authority.
|
|||||
| Gosselin v. N.H. Dep't of Corr., No. 2005-176,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 19, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because violation of a prison disciplinary rule could result in a loss of credits, it fell under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 541-A:21(I)(j) and was exempt from the rulemaking and adjudicative hearing strictures of the New Hampshire Administrative Procedures Act, N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. ch. 541-A; thus, an inmate was not entitled to certiorari relief.
|
|||||
| In re State (Taylor), No. 2005-273,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 19, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While remand was needed to allow trial court to give a father credit on his child support payments for SSDI amounts that his child received, there was no other error; father's lump sum negligence settlement was properly prorated into the future in modifying his support payments, as said sum was gross income under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 458-C:2(IV).
|
|||||
| State v. O'Leary, No. 2005-485,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 19, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder case, the evidence, taken in a light most favorable to defendant, supported the conclusion that no reasonable jury could have found defendant guilty of provocation manslaughter even if the trial court had instructed the jury as defendant requested regarding provocation manslaughter as a lesser-included offense of first degree murder.
|
|||||
| G2003B, LLC v. Town of Weare, No. 2005-408,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 20, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted a motion by a town and property owners to enter a consent decree which agreed that an amended zoning ordinance was unconstitutional as to the property at issue, as the parties provided the trial court with sufficient factual information on which to make the ruling.
|
|||||
| Thomas v. Town of Hooksett, No. 2005-312,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 20, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Municipal estoppel did not require reinstatement of applicant's building permit to build gas station. Applicant did not reasonably rely on false statements of officials for Town of Hookset as to how to protect permit from zoning changes, as statute, former N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 674:39(I), placed applicant on notice of officials' false statements.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
