Cited by

Hosp., 152 N.H. 762, 778 (2005) (observing that the trial court gave the jury “a broad instruction on damages,” stating “that the damage award should be ‘full, fair and adequate’ and that the award should compensate the plaintiff and make her whole”).

Co., 164 N.H. 379, 387 (2012); Carlisle v. Frisbie Mem.

Ultimately, federal “preemption is a matter of law, which we review de novo.” Carlisle v. Frisbie Memorial Hospital, 152 N.H. 762, 770 (2005).

“Under the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitution, state law is preempted where: (1) Congress expresses an intent to displace state law; (2) Congress implicitly supplants state law by granting exclusive regulatory power in a particular field to the federal government; or (3) state and federal law actually conflict.” Carlisle v. Frisbie Mem.

Furthermore, RSA 151:30 (2005) provides a cause of action for violations of the Patients’ Bill of Rights that is “separate from the question of whether there was professional negligence under RSA chapter 507-E.” Carlisle v. Frisbie Mem.

Hosp., 152 N.H. 762, 770 (2005); thus, we now decide the preemption question rather than direct the superior court to decide it on remand.

Hosp., 152 N.H. 762, 777 (2005) (witness is “unavailable” when absent from the hearing and the proponent of the witness has been unable to procure attendance by process or other reasonable means).

Carlisle v. Frisbie Memorial Hosp., 152 N.H. 762, 773-74 (2005).