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 MacLeod v. Chalet Susse International, Inc., 401 A.2d 205.

19 citing documents.

  • Ellis v. Candia Trailers & Snow Equipment, Inc. 58 A.3d 1164 N.H. 2012
    Kidd, 74 N.H. at 170; see Robinson, 1 N.H. at 79 (“[Whether all parts of an agreement are dependent and inseparable] is to be determined by the intent of the parties, as evinced by the language and nature of the whole contract.” (citation omitted)); Piper v. Boston & Railroad, 75 N.H. 435, 439 (1910); see also MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int'l.
  • Lassonde v. Stanton 956 A.2d 332 N.H. 2008
    Linen Serve., 150 N.H. at 597 (if contractual language found to be ambiguous, “it must be determined what the parties, under an objective standard, mutually understood the ambiguous language to mean”); MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243 (1979) (“If...
  • Sherman v. Graciano 872 A.2d 1045 N.H. 2005
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243 (1979) (stating that where parties draft an agreement that leaves uncertain their mutual intent, relevant extrinsic evidence should not be excluded).
  • West v. Turchioe 761 A.2d 382 N.H. 1999
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 209 (1979).
  • Estate of Frederick v. Frederick 687 A.2d 711 N.H. 1996
    Compare MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 208 (1979) (court should determine intent by considering surrounding circumstances) with Logic Assoc’s, Inc. v. Time Share Corp., 124 N.H. 565, 572, 474 A.2d 1006, 1010 (1984) (court will not consider evidence of alleged intent that conflicts with writing); cf. *533 Pacific Gas & Elec.
  • M.A. Crowley Trucking, Inc. v. Moyers 665 A.2d 1077 N.H. 1995
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 208 (1979) (quotation omitted); see Yamamoto v. Commissioner, 73 T.C.
  • Hewes v. Roby 606 A.2d 810 N.H. 1992
    The only exceptions our cases suggest are when the causes of action are mutually exclusive, id., or mutually inconsistent, see MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 245, 401 A.2d 205, 210 (1979), but this case presents neither.
  • Public Service Co. v. Town of Seabrook 580 A.2d 702 N.H. 1990
    If the contract is deemed ambiguous, then the intention of the parties is a question of fact, id.; MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 209 (1979), and the [trial court’s] finding.
  • Attorney General v. Morgan 565 A.2d 1072 N.H. 1989
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 244, 401 A.2d 205, 210 (1979).
  • Logic Associates, Inc. v. Time Share Corp. 474 A.2d 1006 N.H. 1984
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int'l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 242, 401 A.2d 205, 208 (1979) (citations omitted).
  • Holevas v. Mills 469 A.2d 1329 N.H. 1983
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 208 (1979).
  • Moore v. Aksten 459 A.2d 266 N.H. 1983
    Chase v. Avigdor, 122 N.H. 906, 909, 451 A.2d 1313, 1315 (1982); MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 244, 401 A.2d 205, 210 (1979).
  • McElroy v. Gaffney 457 A.2d 429 N.H. 1983
    Nashua Trust Co. v. Weisman, 122 N.H. 397, 399, 445 A.2d 1101, 1102 (1982); MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 209 (1979); Ecko Enterprises, Inc. v. Remi Fortin Constr., Inc., 118 N.H. 37, 41, 382 A.2d 368, 371 (1978).
  • Burley v. Kenneth Hudson, Inc. 448 A.2d 375 N.H. 1982
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int'l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 245, 401 A.2d 205, 210 (1979).
  • Lapierre v. Cabral 444 A.2d 522 N.H. 1982
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 242-43, 401 A.2d 205, 208 (1979); see Ekco Enterprises, Inc. v. Remi Fortin *307 Constr., Inc., 118 N.H. at 41-42, 382 A.2d at 371; Connell v. Company, 88 N.H. 316, 317-18, 188 A. 463, 464 (1936).
  • Gosselin v. Archibald 437 A.2d 302 N.H. 1981
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 208-09 (1979) (quoting Rogers v. Cardinal Realty, Inc., 115 N.H. 285, 286, 339 A.2d 23, 25 (1975)) (citations omitted); Erin Food Servs., Inc. v. 688 Props., 119 N.H. at 235, 401 A.2d at 203.
  • Burrows v. City of Keene 432 A.2d 15 N.H. 1981
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 244, 401 A.2d 205, 210 (1979).
  • Hanslin v. Keith 415 A.2d 329 N.H. 1980
    In the case of such a legal written contract, the “court will in the first instance determine if the written contract is a complete integration of the parties’ agreement.” MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l., Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 243, 401 A.2d 205, 209 (1979).
  • Thiem v. Thomas 406 A.2d 115 N.H. 1979
    MacLeod v. Chalet Susse Int’l, Inc., 119 N.H. 238, 401 A.2d 205 (1979).