Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite Gamble v. University System, 610 A.2d 357.

15 citing documents.

  • Daniel Ro v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company, as Subrogee of Trustees of Dartmouth College Sebastian Lim v. Factory … N.H. 2021
    suming without deciding that law school handbook “set[] out the terms of a contract,” where school did not dispute that issue, but noting that “while courts have treated student handbooks as contracts between students and schools, the question of whether such a document always constitutes a contract is, arguably, an unsettled issue under Massachusetts law”); Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 12 (1992) (noting that the parties agreed that the catalog setting forth the tuition rat
  • Hill-Grant Living Trust v. Kearsarge Lighting Precinct 986 A.2d 662 N.H. 2009
    It must set forth specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial.” Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16-17 (1992).
  • Daniel v. Hawkeye Funding, Ltd. Partnership 843 A.2d 946 N.H. 2004
    “The language of a contract is ambiguous if the parties can reasonably differ as to its meaning.” Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 14 (1992) (emphasis added).
  • Brzica v. Trustees of Dartmouth College 791 A.2d 990 N.H. 2002
    We also agree with the trial court that the plaintiffs’ reliance on Gamble v. University System of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 17 (1992), for the proposition that the Act applies to all matters involving colleges and universities, is not appropriate.
  • N.A.P.P. Realty Trust v. CC Enterprises 784 A.2d 1166 N.H. 2001
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 13-14 (1992).
  • Bezanson v. Hampshire Meadows Development Corp. 742 A.2d 112 N.H. 1999
    [p]ayments due and unpaid under the Contract shall bear interest from the date payment is due at the rate [of] Prime [plus] 2%.” “[T]he proper interpretation of a contract is ultimately a question of law for this court, and we will determine the meaning of the contract based on the meaning that would be attached to it by reasonable persons.” Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N. H. 9, 13, 610 A.2d 357, 360 (1992) (quotation omitted).
  • Appeal of the Timberlane Regional School Board 713 A.2d 988 N.H. 1998
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 13, 610 A.2d 357, 360 (1992).
  • Galloway v. Chicago-Soft, Ltd. 713 A.2d 982 N.H. 1998
    “As a general rule, the proper interpretation of a contract is ultimately a question of law for this court, and we will determine the meaning of the contract based on the meaning that would be attached to it by reasonable persons.” Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 13, 610 A.2d 357, 360 (1992) (quotation and brackets omitted).
  • New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City of Franklin 685 A.2d 913 N.H. 1996
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16, 610 A.2d 357, 362 (1992); see also RSA 491:8-a, IV On this point, we reject the defendants’ argument that the rules of evidence pertaining to expert witness testimony, see N.H. R. Ev.
  • Walsh v. Young 660 A.2d 1139 N.H. 1995
    2d Husband and Wife § 288, at 237 (1968); see Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 13, 610 A.2d 357, 360 (1992).
  • Boissonnault v. Bristol Federated Church 642 A.2d 328 N.H. 1994
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16, 610 A.2d 357, 362 (1992).
  • Dwire v. Sullivan 642 A.2d 1359 N.H. 1994
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16, 610 A.2d 357, 362 (1992).
  • Sherman v. Mulligan 629 A.2d 778 N.H. 1993
    RSA 491:8-a (1983); Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16, 610 A.2d 357, 362 (1992).
  • Holden Engineering & Surveying, Inc. v. Pembroke Road Realty Trust 628 A.2d 260 N.H. 1993
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 13, 610 A.2d 357, 360 (1992).
  • Gould v. George Brox, Inc. 623 A.2d 1325 N.H. 1993
    Gamble v. University of New Hampshire, 136 N.H. 9, 16, 610 A.2d 357, 362 (1992).