Condo Media - March 2014 - 18

by Gary M. Daddario, Esq.

C A I

R e g i o n a l

N e w s

NEW HAMPSHIRE

New Superior Court Rules
An Overview of Important Changes

n a prior article comparing the
condominium statutes of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, it
was noted that New Hampshire's
litigation would become increasingly
similar to litigation filed in Massachusetts. This increasing similarity comes
courtesy of the new Superior Court
rules adopted in New Hampshire and
effective October 2013. This article
provides an overview of some of the
changes.

New Rules

First, note that New Hampshire's
"writ" system is no more. Pursuant to
New Rule 6, claims seeking relief shall
be instituted by way of the filing of a
complaint. Pursuant to New Rule 8, a
complaint shall contain a statement of
material facts upon which the claim is
based and which demonstrate that the
plaintiff is entitled to relief, as well as
a demand for judgment for the relief
sought. Failure to request a jury trial,
where applicable, shall constitute a
waiver of the same.
Under New Rule 9, an answer or
responsive pleading to the complaint shall be filed within 30 days
following service of process. In
addition, within that timeframe, a
notice of appearance must be filed
in addition to the responsive pleading. A defendant's request for a jury
trial must be included on the first
page of the responsive pleading or
the same shall be waived. A defendant may file a motion to dismiss
prior to filing an answer to the
complaint. If so, and the motion
is denied, the defendant may then
file an answer within 30 days of the
denial of the motion.
18

Condo Media * March 2014

In the event that a defendant of a claim
challenges personal jurisdiction, a motion to dismiss may be filed on the issue.
If the motion to dismiss is denied, the
defendant has 30 days to file an appeal or
the issue will be deemed waived. If the
appeal is declined (meaning not heard)

conference, the Superior Court will issue
a case-structuring order.
New Rule 22 obligates parties to
make automatic disclosures. The practical effect of this rule is to cause certain
types of routine discovery to change
hands without the need for parties to

Under New Rule 9, an answer or responsive
pleading to the complaint shall be ﬁled within
30 days following service of process.
by the Supreme Court, the defendant
will then have 30 days to file an answer
in the original case. Since the Supreme
Court will not have heard the issue of the
challenge to personal jurisdiction in this
scenario, that issue will be preserved for
appeal at the end of the original case. If
the appeal is heard but decided against
the defendant, the answer in the original
action will be due in 30 days.
New Rule 5 serves as a precursor to
the case-structuring order. It requires
the parties (or counsel) to confer
within 20 days of the answer date to
reach an agreement on a variety of
issues, including the use of a jury, date
and length of trial, and dates for litigation components.
If the parties reach agreement on the
required issues, a written stipulation may
be filed with the Superior Court within
20 days. In this event, the parties' terms
shall become the case-structuring order
from the court. In the event that the
parties fail to reach agreement or if the
court does not approve of the parties'
terms, then the court will schedule either
a telephonic or a personal appearance for
a case-structuring conference. After said

actually draft the discovery requests
and propound them to each other.
Plaintiffs must produce their disclosures within 30 days after the defendant files an answer. Defendants must
produce their disclosures within 60
days of the filing of their answer.
Other discovery-related rules are also
changed. These include Rule 23 (Written
Interrogatories) and Rule 26 (Depositions). New Rule 25 sets the standards
applicable to discovery of electronically
stored information.
New forms are available via the Superior Court website. Litigants should also
be aware that there have been changes to
some court fees. Filings submitted with
insufficient fees will be rejected and, thus,
not considered to be filed with the court.
There are, of course, additional
details regarding the changes not discussed in this article. Further, there are
additional rule changes. New Hampshire litigants should discuss such matters with their legal counsel. CM
Gary M. Daddario, Esq., is a partner
with the law firm of Perkins and
Anctil, P.C.

Condo Media - March 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Condo Media - March 2014