 |
|
 |
|
|
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 Lowy (N.H. Dep't of HHS), No. 2006-570,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 23, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Medicaid applicant, who was developmentally disabled and lived with his parents, was entitled to have a special needs trust established under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1396p(d)(4)(A) excluded from consideration as a resource in determining his eligibility as a payback provision in the trust including the qualifier "to the extent required by law" was adequate.
|
|||||
| Appeal of Merrimack County (N.H. Pub. Emple. Labor Rel. Bd.), No. 2006-525,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 23, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: County was properly ordered to implement an arbitrator's award mandating reinstatement of a union employee, who had been terminated from her employment at a county nursing home, because the issue was not whether the employee's conduct violated a public policy in favor of competent nursing care, 42 C.F.R. § 483.13, but whether the reinstatement did.
|
|||||
| Auger v. Town of Strafford, No. 2006-646,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 23, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no evidence that a loop road configuration would cause undue hardship or injustice to a developer, as required by RSA 674:36(II)(n) (Supp. 2006), the town board erred by waiving a 10-lot requirement; the trial court should have reversed approval of the wetlands area for lack of specificity instead of remanding it.
|
|||||
| Lachance v. United States Smokeless Tobacco Co., No. 2006-564,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 24, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred by granting judgment on the pleadings to smokeless tobacco products companies because the purchasers of their products, as indirect purchasers, could bring a cause of action against the smokeless tobacco products companies under RSA 358-A:2(XIV) of the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act, RSA ch. 358-A.
|
|||||
| State v. Sodoyer, No. 2006-541,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 24, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the actual leaseholder no longer lived in the apartment and did not have the requisite actual authority to consent to its search, the police lacked authority to search the bedroom where defendant's possessions were found under U.S. Const. amend. IV, and N.H. Const. pt. I, art. 19 without his consent.
|
|||||
| Miller v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co., No. 2006-904,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 28, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As insurer's owned vehicle exclusion precluded UM coverage for any injuries sustained by insured while "occupying" any uninsured motor vehicle he owned, and "occupying" was defined as "in, upon, getting in, on, out or off" of vehicle, exclusion did not apply to insured who was stuck by car after being thrown 40 feet from his uninsured motorcycle.
|
|||||
| State v. Beede, No. 2006-011,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 28, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions of theft by unauthorized taking were affirmed, because the trial court properly admitted bank records as evidence, as signatures contained within checks and money orders constituted party-opponent admissions under N.H. R. Evid. 801(d)(2), and the signatures were self-authenticating.
|
|||||
| Tiberghein v. B.R. Jones Roofing Co., No. 2006-657,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, August 28, 2007, Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As RSA 507:7-h, which applied to arbitration awards, entitled non-settling tortfeasor to reduction in amount of the judgment equal to the consideration the plaintiff received from a settlement with one of two or more tortfeasors, defendant was entitled to a credit from the award in the amount of settlements plaintiffs received from other parties.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
