DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite City of Keene v. Gerry's Cash Market, Inc., 304 A.2d 873.

14 citing documents.

  • Londonderry School District SAU 12 v. State 958 A.2d 930 N.H. 2008
    See, e.g., In re Guardianship of R.A., 155 N.H. 98, 100-01 (2007) (challenge moot where relevant statute no longer in effect); State in the Interest of Jane Doe, 118 N.H. 330, 333 (1978) (declining to entertain question of statutory construction where statute was repealed); Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 168 (1973) (recognizing that dispute over injunctive relief was moot where ordinance at issue repealed).
  • Appeal of McDonough 816 A.2d 1022 N.H. 2003
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 167-68 (1975).
  • Handley v. Town of Hooksett 785 A.2d 399 N.H. 2001
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 167-68 (1973).
  • Neville v. Highfields Farm, Inc. 744 A.2d 89 N.H. 1999
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 167, 304 A.2d 873, 875 (1973).
  • Kibbe v. Town of Milton 700 A.2d 1224 N.H. 1997
    see Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 168, 304 A.2d 873, 875 (1973) (statutes regulating form of ballots generally are regarded as directory rather than mandatory).
  • Appeal of Soucy 649 A.2d 60 N.H. 1994
    Under the law of New Hampshire, therefore, to set aside an election the party challenging the results must prove either “fraud which leaves the intent of the voters in doubt or irregularities in the conduct of the [election] of such a nature as to affect the result.” Leonard v. School District, 98 N.H. 296, 297, 99 A.2d 415, 416 (1953); see Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 166-67, 304 A.2d 873, 874-75 (1973); Attorney-General v. Folsom, 69 N.H. 556, 558, 45 A. 410, 410 (1899).
  • Treisman v. Town of Bedford 563 A.2d 786 N.H. 1989
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 167, 304 A.2d 873, 875 (1973); cf. Concrete Co. v. Rheaume Builders, 101 N.H. 59, 61, 132 A.2d 133, 136 (1957) (refusing to construe a proposal to amend the State Constitution in a way contrary to the clear import of its language despite evidence that, given the surrounding circumstances, the voters may have intend
  • Town of Derry v. Adams 431 A.2d 766 N.H. 1981
    Defendant Casten, relying on Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 304 A.2d 873 (1973), also argues that the instruction to the voters to “vote for two” was a mere technical irregularity in the form of the ballot and should not be applied to defeat the will of or to disfranchise the voters.
  • Bourgeois v. Town of Bedford 412 A.2d 1021 N.H. 1980
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 304 A.2d 873 *148 (1973); McKinney v. Riley, 105 N.H. 249, 197 A.2d 218 (1964).
  • State v. Hutchins 380 A.2d 257 N.H. 1977
    6 E. McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 21.34, at 269 (3d ed. 1969); see, e.g., Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 168, 304 A.2d 873, 875-76 (1973); Davy v. Dover, 111 N.H. 1, 4, 273 A.2d 849, 851 (1971).
  • Opinion of the Justices 367 A.2d 209 N.H. 1976
    Nickerson v. Aimo, 110 N.H. 348, 351, 266 A.2d 828, 830 (1970); Murchie v. Clifford, 76 N.H. 99, 102, 79 A. 901, 902 (1911); see Opinion of the Justices, 114 N.H. 784, 330 A.2d 774 (1974); Opinion of the Justices, 114 N.H. 711, 327 A.2d 713 (1974); Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 304 A.2d 873 (1973).
  • Barcomb v. Herman 358 A.2d 400 N.H. 1976
    Compare McDonnell v. Derry, 116 N.H. 3, 6, 7, 350 A.2d 620, 622, 623 (1976) with Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Market, Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 168, 304 A.2d 873, 875 (1973); see Annot., 119 A.L.R.
  • Opinion of the Justices 330 A.2d 774 N.H. 1974
    Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Market, Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 168, 304 A.2d 873, 875 (1973); Nickerson v. Aimo, 110 N.H. 348, 351, 266 A.2d 828, 830 (1970); see Opinion of the Justices, 114 N.H. 711, 327 A.2d 713 (1974).
  • Opinion of the Justices 327 A.2d 713 N.H. 1974
    They provide a convenient and uniform method for voting, but should not be applied to disenfranchise voters because of technical irregularities.” Keene v. Gerry’s Cash Mkt., Inc., 113 N.H. 165, 304 A.2d 873 (1973).