NHCaseLaw.com

GALWAY, J. The plaintiffs, Howard Joseph Guyotte and Louise A. Guyotte, appeal, and the defendants, Michael O’Neill and Bay Shores Building and Remodeling, LLC, cross-appeal, from a jury verdict in Superior Court (Smukler, J.) in favor of the defendants. We affirm.

DUGGAN, J. The defendants, Robert Boynton and Tina LaRochelle (tenants), appeal a decision of the Hooksett District Court (LaPointe, J.) ruling against them in an action by the plaintiff, Liam Hooksett, LLC, for unpaid rent and possession of certain property based upon nonpayment of rent. See RSA 540:13 (2007). We hold that the plaintiff failed to establish that it is the owner or lessor of the property at issue. See RSA 540:12 (2007). We further hold that, because the plaintiff filed an action to recover both possession and unpaid rent against the tenants, the tenants were statutorily entitled to raise any defense, claim, or counterclaim in response to the plaintiff’s action. See RSA 540:13, III (2007). Accordingly, we reverse.

BRODERICK, C.J. The defendants, Charles and Susan Stanton, appeal a judgment of the Superior Court (Vaughan, J.) finding them liable for breach of contract and defamation. The plaintiff, Harold Lassonde, III, doing business as Mountain View Construction, cross-appeals, challenging the amount of damages awarded on his defamation claim, and the trial court’s failure to include attorney’s fees and interest in his breach of contract award. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

BRODERICK, C.J. The respondent, Vermont Mutual Insurance Company (Vermont Mutual), appeals the denial by the Superior Court (Abramson, J.) of its summary judgment motion, and the grant of petitioner Marilyn Bates’ cross-motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

Before the court is one of several similar lawsuits concerning the alleged failure of numerous insurance companies to refund unearned insurance premiums to their clients. Sharon Dunn and Robin Preve (the "plaintiffs") are purchasers of credit life and credit disability insurance issued by American Heritage Life Insurance Company ("the defendant" or "AHL"), a credit insurer. The plaintiffs have brought an action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against the defendant, alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) restitution; (4) breach of fiduciary duty; (5) conversion; and (6) equitable relief including an accounting, the imposition of a constructive trust, and an order requiring AHL to implement controls to assure the prompt refund of unearned premiums. The plaintiffs now move for class certification as to Count I (Breach of Contract), contending that this case satisfies the requirements of Superior Court Rule 27-A. The defendant objects. Upon review of the parties' pleadings and the applicable law, the court finds and rules as follows.

The plaintiffs have brought suit against three sets of attorneys alleging negligence on their part regarding a failed business transaction. The plaintiffs are the owners of Television Station WNDS, and they executed an Asset Purchase Agreement for its sale on September 26, 1996, with Ramcast Corp., predecessor in interest to a company named Global Broadcasting System, Inc. Pursuant to the Agreement, the plaintiffs turned over possession of the television station to Global on April 4, 1997. The purchase price was 18 million dollars and representations were made by Global's attorneys, based upon the assurances of Global's principals, that the moneys had been wired that day to the plaintiffs when in fact they had not. The plaintiffs initially sued Global for breach of contract and recovered a judgment. However, the judgment is uncollected because of the bankruptcy of Global.

The petitioners, James A. Davala, et al., brought this petition in equity against the respondents, the Town of Merrimack and its Board of Selectmen, seeking damages and other relief arising from the respondents' termination of certain retirement benefit plans. The respondents seek summary judgment. For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

The plaintiff claims the defendant failed to pay damages under an insurance contract for uninsured motorist coverage and acted with bad faith when it adjusted the plaintiffs uninsured motorist coverage. The defendant moves to stay the plaintiffs bad faith claim, arguing proceeding on this claim at the same time as the plaintiffs breach of contract claim may be a waste of the parties’ and the court’s resources and is prejudicial to the defendant. The plaintiff objects. The court held a hearing on this matter on September 2, 2005. After a review of the parties’ pleadings and the applicable law, the court finds and rules as follows.

The present matter before the Court is in the opening stages of a potential class action law suit. Amanda Carlisle, the plaintiff, has brought this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated against St. Mary's Credit Union ("the defendant" or "St. Mary's''). The plaintiff and other members of the putative class are purchasers of credit life and/or accident and disability insurance issued by Universal Underwriters Life Insurance Company ("UULIC") who financed their purchases through retail installment sales contracts. The defendant is the assignee/holder of the contracts. This case arises out of the defendant's failure to provide notice to UULIC regarding the plaintiffs prepayment of her loan prior to the expiration of the credit insurance coverage and loan terms. The defendant now moves to dismiss the plaintiffs Writ, arguing that the relevant statute, RSA 361-A, fails to provide a private right of action for the plaintiffs claims. The plaintiff objects. On September 8, 2005, the Court held a hearing on this motion. For the reasons stated in this order, the defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED.

The plaintiffs, Frederick Amoche ("Amoche"), Diane Dauphinais ("Dauphinais"), and Jon Valliere ("Valliere") initiated this cause of action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against the defendant, Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Company ("GTL"). The plaintiffs each allegedly purchased credit life and/or credit disability insurance issued by the defendant, a credit insurer, as part of a retail installment sales contract for the purchase of an automobile. The plaintiffs have asserted five claims arising from the defendant's alleged breach of its contractual, statutory, and fiduciary obligations to refund unearned premiums to the plaintiffs upon early loan repayment.