NHCaseLaw.com

Lisa Brown appeals the January 31, 2002 decision of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights (the "Commission") finding no probable cause that her employer, Ever Better Eating, Inc. ("EBE") was responsible for sexual harassment that occurred at the workplace. EBE moves for summary judgment. Ms. Brown objects, and also moves for summary judgment. After considering the parties' motions, the Court finds and rules as follows.

This is a civil action for damages for sexual abuse committed against the plaintiff by Brother Beaulieu, a member of the Order of the Sacred Heart, a former teacher at Bishop Guertin High School, and a former staff employee at Camp Fatima. The plaintiff alleges he was sexually abused and molested by Beaulieu between 1972 and 1975 while a camper at Camp Fatima and a student at Bishop Guertin High School. The alleged abuse ended in the fall of 1975 during the plaintiffs junior year at Bishop Guertin when Beaulieu attempted to force the plaintiff to perform fellatio. After the forcible assault, the plaintiff left school and never returned.

Brock, C.J. The defendant, David M. Groff, Esq., appeals from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Lawyers Title Insurance Corp., on its claims for breach of contract and negligence. Following a bench trial, the Superior Court (Conboy, J.) ruled that the defendant was vicariously liable for a title search conducted by a third party. We reverse.

The plaintiff and her husband file this lawsuit seeking damages for injuries the plaintiff sustained when she was hit in the head with a softball during a slow-pitch softball tournament on September 13, 1998. At the time, the plaintiff was a member of the Dover Co-Recreational Softball League. The plaintiff became injured after a male shortstop allegedly negligently threw the ball while she was running to first base. The defendants move to dismiss all counts on several grounds, including a claim that the defendants owed the plaintiff no duty of care. For the reasons stated in this order, the court grants the motion to dismiss as to all counts.

Plaintiff asserts four claims against Attorney Groff: negligence, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty, all arising from Attorney Groff's alleged duties to plaintiff; and negligence, arising from Attorney Groff's alleged duties to Republic, to which plaintiff is subrogated. The essence of plaintiff's claims is that Walsh was negligent in failing to find and report the Hancock mortgage, that Walsh's negligence is imputable to Attorney Groff, and that Attorney Groff is liable for his own negligence.