Thu, 10/16/2008 - 08:52 — NHCaseLaw.com
GALWAY, J. The defendant, Christopher Legere, was convicted following a jury trial in Superior Court (McGuire, J.) of the second degree murder of John Denoncourt. See RSA 630:1-b, I(a), I(b) (2007). He appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of various witnesses. We affirm.
Tue, 08/19/2008 - 20:48 — DLG
Petitioners, Suzanne and Todd Adamcryck, bring this pro se appeal of the decision of the City of Concord Zoning Board of Adjustment ("ZBA" or "the Board") granting variance requests by the intervenor, Laconia Savings Bank ("LSB"). The City and LSB object to the relief requested by the petitioners. After hearing and upon consideration of the parties' oral and written arguments, the record, and applicable law, the Court finds and rules as follows.
Sat, 02/09/2008 - 21:56 — DLG
The plaintiffs, Joseph Laramie and Timothy Hallam, brought separate actions against the above-captioned defendants, their employer, the New Hampshire Department of Corrections (DOC), their supervisor, Bruce Cattell, and co-workers Shawn Stone and Todd Connor. The cases were consolidated for pretrial purposes on August 14, 2006, since plaintiffs’ writs set forth virtually identical claims against the same defendants. In Count I of their writs, plaintiffs assert a claim against DOC for wrongful termination of their employment. Counts II and III allege, respectively, claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and intentional interference with contractual relations against all the individual defendants. Count IV asserts a claim against defendant Cattell, warden of the New Hampshire State Prison in Concord at the relevant times, for deprivation of plaintiffs’ civil rights, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”).
Lastly, Count V asserts a claim for the so-called “false light” variety of tortious invasion of privacy, which plaintiff Laramie brings against defendants Stone and Connor and plaintiff Hallem brings against all individual defendants. Presently before the court are the defendants’ motions for summary judgment.