 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Paul v. Sherburne, No. 2005-326,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 21, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of malicious prosecution claim was reversed as trial court erred when it ruled favorable determination in underlying case must be decisive and that dismissal on technical or procedural ground did not constitute decisive termination; underlying matter terminated in plaintiff's favor when defendant failed to appear for hearing on merits.
|
|||||
| Richmond's Case, No. LD-2003-008,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 21, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred for violating N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.4(a), 1.8(a), 1.15(a)(1) and (c), 1.16(d), and 8.4(a); among other things, the attorney pressured the client into signing a fee agreement without explaining the risks and consequences, and the attorney transacted and cashed in securities contrary to the client's express instructions.
|
|||||
| Vandemark v. McDonald's Corp., No. 2005-412,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 21, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Franchiser was entitled to summary judgment on custodian's negligence and vicarious liability claims where, inter alia, franchiser did not assume duty to ensure management company would follow franchiser's security measures and relevant documents expressly provided that there was no agency relationship between franchiser and management company.
|
|||||
| Mortgage Specialists, Inc. v. Davey, No. 2005-067,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 26, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's denial of an employer's motion to set aside the jury's verdict was affirmed because a reasonable jury could find from the evidence that the employer's customer information was not subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. Accordingly, it was not a trade secret under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 350-B:1(IV)(b).
|
|||||
| DeBenedetto v. CLD Consulting Eng'rs, Inc., No. 2005-262,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, July 27, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in instructing jury to consider apportioning fault to "non-parties," an individual and state transportation agency, as N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 507:7-e's language showed legislature did not intend to limit fault considerations to parties to action without taking into account, for example, those who had settled or were immune.
|
|||||
| Durgin v. Pillsbury Lake Water Dist., No. 2005-328,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 1, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court correctly ruled that there was insufficient evidence to support a property owner's claimed existence of an implied contract in a breach of contract action against a water district because the water district's obligation to provide an adequate supply of water under N.H. Code Admin. R. Ann. Env.-Ws 372.32(b) did not create the contract.
|
|||||
| Hounsell v. N. Conway Water Precinct, No. 2005-505,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 1, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly held that an investigatory report was exempt from disclosure under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 91-A:5(IV). The report, which resulted from allegations that one employee was harassing another, could have resulted in disciplinary action and was thus a record pertaining to internal personnel practices.
|
|||||
| State v. McGill, No. 2004-442,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 1, 2006, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a prosecution of defendant for first degree assault, trial court erred in barring defendant from impeaching the complaining witness with a prior felony conviction. Under N.H. R. Evid. 609(a)(1), trial court was required to admit evidence of the witness's prior conviction if its probative value outweighed its prejudicial effect to defendant.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
