TORT (101)

Sica v. Britton, et al., 05-C-213 (Strafford, Feb. 1, 2007)

This is a medical malpractice action brought by the plaintiffs, Philip J. ("Philip") and Catherine ("Catherine") Sica, against the defendants, John C. Britton, M.D. ("Dr. Britton") anal Surgical Associates of Rochester, P.C. The plaintiffs allege Dr. Britton negligently performed a surgery on Philip, causing injuries and losses to Philip and loss of consortium to Catherine. The defendants now move in limine to preclude the plaintiffs from introducing medical expenses written off by Philip's medical care providers. The plaintiffs object. Neither party has requested a hearing on this motion in limine, nor does the court find that a hearing would assist it in determining the pending issue. Accordingly, pursuant to Superior Court Rule 58, the court acts on the pending motion on the basis of the pleadings and record before it.

Lassonde v. Stanton, et al., 2007-447 (N.H. S.Ct., Aug. 15, 2008)

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.

Sara Realty, LLC v. Country Pond Fish and Game Club, Inc., 07-E-0204 (Rockingham, Jun. 25, 2008)

The petitioner, Sara Realty, LLC, (“Sara Realty”), brings this action against Country Pond Fish and Game Club, Inc. (“CPFGC”), seeking to have the Court declare and rule that CPFGC “has and continues to engage in a private nuisance” by virtue of its “engaging in and allowing . . . outdoor gun shooting activities” without having effectuated “adequate noise control or abatement measures” after its removal of trees and vegetation and its terrain alterations within an area of its property situated close to that of Sara Realty. See particularly Petition for Declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief, III, B. and C. and IV, 1 and 2. The petitioner seeks, as well, to have the Court issue injunctive relief prohibiting CPFGC “from engaging in and allowing any outdoor shooting activities until and unless . . . . [it] has implemented adequate noise control measures.” Id.

Cook v. Demeule, 05-C-319 (Strafford, Jan. 12, 2007)

The plaintiff, Maida E. Demeule, commenced this negligence action against the defendant, Linda M. Morin-Binder, seeking damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained from a motor vehicle accident in May 2004 ("the accident"). The plaintiff now moves in limine to introduce evidence at trail of medical bills written off by the plaintiffs medical care providers. The defendant objects, The plaintiff also moves to take videotaped depositions. The defendant assents in part. On January 8, 2007, the court held, a hearing on these matters. After a review of the parties' arguments and the applicable law, the court finds and rules as follows.

MBNA Bank America, NA v. Cornock, 03-C-0018 (Hillsborough, North, Mar. 20, 2007)

In this civil action, the plaintiff, MBNA America Bank, NA ("MBNA"), seeks to enforce an arbitration award against the defendant, Troy T. Cornock ("the defendant"). Presently before the Court is the defendant's motion for summary judgment. MBNA objects. After consideration of the parties' pleadings, evidence, argument, and applicable law, the Court grants the defendant's motion.

Christiansen v. Kunze, 07-C-0004 (Cheshire, Feb. 14, 2008)

NOW COMES the plaintiff, Heath Christiansen, by and through his attorneys, Schuster, Buttrey & Wing, P.A., and, by way of Objection to the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment As To The Measure of Medical Expense Damages, respectfully states as follows:

Buckley, et al. v. New Hampshire Republican State Committee, et al., 04-E-0328 (Hillsborough, North, Jun. 12, 2006)

This matter arises out of an alleged phone-jamming scheme during the November 2002 election. The background of this matter has been summarized in earlier orders. Therefore, the Court proceeds directly to the merits of the pending motions to dismiss, regarding which a hearing was held on April 11, 2006.

Doe v. Concord School Dist., SAU #8, 07-E-0388 (Merrimack, Nov. 14, 2007)

Plaintiffs Jane Doe I, Jane Doe II and Jane Doe III are female student athletes who presently attend, or who have formerly attended, Concord High School. School photographs pertaining to the plaintiffs as student athleteswere discovered on a school-issued laptop computer assigned to William Haubrich, the former athletic director of Concord High School. The students' photographs are alleged by plaintiffs to have been found in proximity to pornographic photographs women who physically resembled the plaintiffs.

CTV of Derry, Inc., et al. v. Begley, et al., 00-C-429 (Rockingham, Feb. 6, 2002)

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.

Corbin v. Talarico Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc., et al., 03-C-876 (Hillsborough, North, Jul. 2, 2004)

The plaintiff, Corey Corbin, brought the instant action against defendants, Talarico Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc. ("TPC"), and Stephen Talarico. In the writ, the plaintiff asserts the following four counts against the defendant(s): (1) Discrimination, Harassment, Hostile Environment at TPC and Aiding and Abetting Therein by Mr. Talarico Based on SexualOrientation; (2) Wrongful Discharge; (3) Slander/Libel; and (4) Invasion of Privacy. Thedefendants now move to dismiss Counts III and IV. The court heard argument on the defendants' motion on April 21, 2004. The plaintiff agreed to dismiss the claim for invasion of privacy against Mr. Talarico individually, conceding the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. For the reasons discussed herein, the defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Syndicate content