Cited by
Opinions in New Hampshire that cite Everitt v. General Electric Co., 932 A.2d 831.
- Appeal of Michael G. Cross N.H. 2024
- Spooner v. Phoenix 435 P.3d 462 Ariz. Ct. App. 2018
- Lynette Maryea v. Thomas Velardi & A 168 N.H. 633 N.H. 2016
-
John Farrelly v. City of Concord & A
130 A.3d 548
N.H. 2015
Co., 156 N.H. 202 (2007) applies to intentional torts.
- Jeffrey Frost & A. v. Michael Delaney & A 128 A.3d 663 N.H. 2015
-
Judith Tompson v. Rockingham County Sheriff's Office
N.H. 2015
Co., 156 N.H. 202 (2007), the plaintiff argues that the deputy’s wanton and reckless conduct negates official immunity, and that the defendant is vicariously liable for the deputy’s conduct.
-
Scott Robinson v. Hillsborough County & a.
N.H. 2015
Co., 156 N.H. 202, 210 (2007) (quotations and citations omitted).
- James A. Conrad v. New Hampshire Department of Safety & a. 167 N.H. 59 N.H. 2014
-
Kenneth Lahm v. Michael Farrington & a.
90 A.3d 620
N.H. 2014
Co., 156 N.H. 202, 219 (2007) (holding that “municipal police officers are immune from personal liability for decisions, acts or omissions that are: (1) made within the scope of their official duties while in the course of their employment; (2) discretionary, rather than ministerial; and (3) not made in a wanton or reckless manner”).
-
Ojo v. Lorenzo
64 A.3d 974
N.H. 2013
Alternatively, the defendants argued that they were entitled to immunity under RSA 507:8-d (2010) and official immunity under Everitt v. General Electric Co., 156 N.H. 202 (2007).
-
Ford v. New Hampshire Department of Transportation
163 N.H. 284
N.H. 2012
Co., 156 N.H. 202, 220 (2007) (discretionary functions falling within the protection of the discretionary function immunity doctrine “are limited to discretionary decisions involving.
-
Ford v. NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPT. OF TRANSP.
37 A.3d 436
N.H. 2012
Co., 156 N.H. 202, 220, 932 A.2d 831 (2007) (discretionary functions falling within the protection of the discretionary function immunity doctrine "are limited to discretionary decisions involving...
- Ocasio v. Federal Express Corp. 33 A.3d 1139 N.H. 2011
- State v. HESS CORP. 982 A.2d 388 N.H. 2009
-
Everitt v. General Electric Co.
979 A.2d 760
N.H. 2009
This is the second time this matter has come before us. A detailed account of the underlying facts of this case can be found in our previous decision, Everitt v. General Electric Company, 156 N.H. 202 (2007).
- Colony Insurance v. Dover Indoor Climbing Gym 974 A.2d 399 N.H. 2009
- Goodrich v. Goodrich 960 A.2d 1275 N.H. 2008
- Goodrich v. Goodrich 158 N.H. 130 N.H. 2008
- Tarbell Administrator, Inc. v. City of Concord 956 A.2d 322 N.H. 2008
-
State v. Hutchinson
942 A.2d 1289
N.H. 2008
Co., 156 N.H. 202, 207-08 (2007) (declining to address arguments raised beyond the scope of the interlocutory question presented).