Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite Briere v. Briere, 224 A.2d 588.

16 citing documents.

  • Bonte v. Bonte 616 A.2d 464 N.H. 1992
    The following year, we extended the Dean holding in Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 224 A.2d 588 (1966), and abolished the court-created parental immunity doctrine adopted in Levesque.
  • Renovest Co. v. Hodges Development Corp. 600 A.2d 448 N.H. 1991
    Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 434, 224 A.2d 588, 590 (1966); Dean v. Smith, 106 N.H. 314, 317, 211 A.2d 410, 412-13 (1965).
  • Mayer v. Town of Hampton 497 A.2d 1206 N.H. 1985
    Shades, etc., supra at 611; see Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 434, 224 A.2d 588, 590 (1966).
  • Waid v. Ford Motor Co. 484 A.2d 1152 N.H. 1984
    In Vickers v. Vickers, 109 N.H. 69, 71, 242 A.2d 57, 58 (1968), we gave only prospective effect to our earlier decision of Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 224 A.2d 588 (1966), which abolished parental immunity from negligence claims by unemancipated children.
  • Feldman v. Feldman 480 A.2d 34 N.H. 1984
    Consequently, “it is the duty of the judiciary to examine it and make such changes as justice requires when the Legislature has chosen not to act.” Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 434, 224 A.2d 588, 590 (1966).
  • Sandoval v. Sandoval 623 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1981
  • Merrill v. City of Manchester 332 A.2d 378 N.H. 1974
    Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 434, 224 A.2d 588, 590 (1966); Holytz v. Milwaukee, 17 Wis.
  • Forbes v. Boynton 313 A.2d 129 N.H. 1973
    Dunlap v. Dunlap, 84 N.H. 352, 367, 150 A. 905, 912 (1930);Johnson v. Johnson, 107 N.H. 30, 32, 216 A.2d 781, 783 (1966); Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 435, 224 A.2d 588, 590 (1966).
  • Sargent v. Ross 308 A.2d 528 N.H. 1973
    2 F. Harper and F. James, supra at 1508; see Hurley v. Town of Hudson, 112 N.H. 365, 296 A.2d 905 (1972) (sovereign tort immunity disapproved); Dean v. Smith, 106 N.H. 314, 211 A.2d 410 (1965) and Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 224 A.2d 588 (1966) (parental tort immunity abolished); Derby v. Public Serv.
  • State v. Merski 307 A.2d 825 N.H. 1973
    As was said in Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 434, 224 A.2d 588, 589-90 (1966), “We do not believe that our case should be determined by the number of authorities which support one rule or the other, any more than that a jury should resolve issues according to the number of witnesses who appear for the plaintiff or the defendant.” However, in the present case w
  • Taylor v. Bullock 279 A.2d 585 N.H. 1971
  • Streenz v. Streenz 471 P.2d 282 Ariz. 1970
  • Hunter v. R. G. Watkins & Son, Inc. 265 A.2d 15 N.H. 1970
    In any event the change in rule which die Vickers case made prospective was made in Briere v. Briere, 107 N.H. 432, 224 A.2d 588 and applied to the parties diere.
  • Streenz v. Streenz 461 P.2d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. 1970
  • Silesky Ex Rel. Silesky v. Kelman 161 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1968
  • Purcell v. Frazer 435 P.2d 736 Ariz. Ct. App. 1967