15 New Hampshire opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Hampshire courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Saunders v. Town of Kingstongreen2 sentences2025In fact, several of those witnesses testified that the amount their districts spend on special education alone, see RSA 198:40-a, II(d), exceeds the total amount of differentiated aid received by the districts. 11 [¶24] The law of the case doctrine provides that “[q]uestions once decided on appeal to this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent appeal.” Saunders v. Town of Kingston, 160 N.H. 560, 566 (2010) (quotation omitted). 2020See Saunders v. Town of Kingston, 160 N.H. 560, 566 (2010) (describing the law of the case doctrine); Perrault v. Town of New Hampton, 171 N.H. 183 , 187-88 (2018) (describing the limited precedential value of plurality opinions). 9 and necessitated costly litigation on the part of the beneficiaries.” The Former Co-Trustees do not directly challenge these findings and legal rulings on appeal, nor could they do so given that the trial court accurately summarized and applied the relevant law to factual findings upheld in Hodges. | 7 | 8 |
Taylor v. Nuttinggreen2 sentences2025See id. at 161-68 ; see also Taylor v. Nutting, 133 N.H. 451, 454-55 (1990) (explaining that the law of the case doctrine does not apply “where the issue before the court was not fully briefed and squarely decided when the case was previously before the court” (quotation omitted)). 2023See Gray v. Kelly, 161 N.H. 160, 164-65 (2010) (explaining doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel); Taylor v. Nutting, 133 N.H. 451, 454-57 (1990) (explaining doctrine of law of the case). | 4 | 4 |
Merrimack Valley Wood Products, Inc. v. Neargreen2 sentences2010See id. at 202 . 2010As noted, the doctrine applies to “successive stages of the same litigation” or to “any subsequent appeal or retrial of the same case.” Merrimack Valley Wood Prods., 152 N.H. at 201. | 2 | 2 |
Gray v. Kellygreen1 sentence2023See Gray v. Kelly, 161 N.H. 160, 164-65 (2010) (explaining doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel); Taylor v. Nutting, 133 N.H. 451, 454-57 (1990) (explaining doctrine of law of the case). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Scott Robinsongreen1 sentence2018See Saunders v. Town of Kingston, 160 N.H. 560, 566 (2010) (explaining that questions explicitly decided or decided by necessary inference by this court constitute the law of the case and are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent appeal); see also State v. Robinson, 170 N.H. 52, 60-61 (2017) (discussing the reach of the law of the case doctrine). | 1 | 1 |
City of San Antonio v. Edwardsgreen1 sentence2010The doctrine is based on public policy and is aimed at putting an end to litigation.” City of San Antonio v. Edwards, 974 S.W.2d 148, 151 (Tex. App. 1998) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pattersongreen1 sentence2005State v. Patterson, 145 N.H. 462, 466 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
In re Ryan G.green2 sentences2000Such decisions become binding on the parties, and we will not reexamine them in the same case upon a subsequent appeal.” In re Ryan G., 142 N.H. 643, 647 , 707 A.2d 134, 137 (1998) (quotations, citation, and brackets omitted). 2000Such decisions become binding on the parties, and we will not reexamine them in the same case upon a subsequent appeal.” In re Ryan G., 142 N.H. 643, 647 , 707 A.2d 134, 137 (1998) (quotations, citation, and brackets omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Barney v. Winona & St. Peter Railroadgreen1 sentence1990The law of the case doctrine does not apply, however, where different evidence is presented on the subsequent appeal, see Lynch v. Grundy, 98 N.H. 282, 284 , 98 A.2d 160, 161 (1953); see also Barney v. Winona, &c., Railroad Co., 117 U.S. 228, 231 (1886); Perron v. Royal Oak Bd. of Ed., 155 Mich. App. 759, 766 , 400 N.W.2d 709, 713 (1986), or where the issue before the court was not “fully briefed and squarely decided” when the case was previously before the court. | 1 | 1 |
Eastern Marine Construction Corp. v. First Southern Leasing, Ltd.green2 sentences1990In addition, the law of the case doctrine only applies when the same issue was actually litigated and decided on a prior appeal, Security State Bank, 230 Neb. at 845 , 434 N.W.2d at 292 , while the doctrine of res judicata encompasses not only issues actually litigated in a prior proceeding, but also issues which could have been raised, based on the factual transaction in question, see Eastern Marine, 129 N.H. at 275 , 525 A.2d at 712 . 1990In addition, the law of the case doctrine only applies when the same issue was actually litigated and decided on a prior appeal, Security State Bank, 230 Neb. at 845 , 434 N.W.2d at 292 , while the doctrine of res judicata encompasses not only issues actually litigated in a prior proceeding, but also issues which could have been raised, based on the factual transaction in question, see Eastern Marine, 129 N.H. at 275 , 525 A.2d at 712 . | 1 | 1 |
Vallee v. Spaulding Fibre Co.green2 sentences1990Lange , 263 Minn, at 156, 116 N.W.2d at 269 . “[Adjudication aims at a correct decision, and if [an appellate court] is convinced that the first decision was palpably wrong, the doctrine of the law of the case [does] not preclude correction of the error.” Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 121; see Vallee v. Company, 89 N.H. 558, 558 , 199 A. 894, 894 (1938) (once questions of law are decided on appeal, they will not be reexamined upon a subsequent appeal unless equity and justice require it). 1990Lange , 263 Minn, at 156, 116 N.W.2d at 269 . “[Adjudication aims at a correct decision, and if [an appellate court] is convinced that the first decision was palpably wrong, the doctrine of the law of the case [does] not preclude correction of the error.” Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 121; see Vallee v. Company, 89 N.H. 558, 558 , 199 A. 894, 894 (1938) (once questions of law are decided on appeal, they will not be reexamined upon a subsequent appeal unless equity and justice require it). | 1 | 1 |
Martineau v. Waldmangreen2 sentences1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). 1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). | 1 | 1 |
Southern Railway Co. v. Kentuckygreen1 sentence1990Co. v. Kentucky, 284 U.S. 338, 341 (1932); Natty, 253 Cal. Rptr. at 111 , 763 P.2d at 962 ; Sigurdson, 448 N.W.2d at 64 . | 1 | 1 |
Lemire v. Haleygreen2 sentences1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). 1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). | 1 | 1 |
Robertson v. Monroegreen2 sentences1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). 1990“Questions once decided [on appeal to] this court are not ordinarily reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent [appeal].” Robertson v. Monroe, 80 N.H. 258, 264 , 116 A. 92, 96 (1922) (citation omitted); see Martineau v. Waldman, 93 N.H. 386, 387 , 42 A.2d 735, 736 (1945); Lemire v. Haley, 93 N.H. 206, 207 , 39 A.2d 10, 11 (1944). | 1 | 1 |
Perron v. ROYAL OAK BD. OF EDUCATIONgreen2 sentences1990The law of the case doctrine does not apply, however, where different evidence is presented on the subsequent appeal, see Lynch v. Grundy, 98 N.H. 282, 284 , 98 A.2d 160, 161 (1953); see also Barney v. Winona, &c., Railroad Co., 117 U.S. 228, 231 (1886); Perron v. Royal Oak Bd. of Ed., 155 Mich. App. 759, 766 , 400 N.W.2d 709, 713 (1986), or where the issue before the court was not “fully briefed and squarely decided” when the case was previously before the court. 1990The law of the case doctrine does not apply, however, where different evidence is presented on the subsequent appeal, see Lynch v. Grundy, 98 N.H. 282, 284 , 98 A.2d 160, 161 (1953); see also Barney v. Winona, &c., Railroad Co., 117 U.S. 228, 231 (1886); Perron v. Royal Oak Bd. of Ed., 155 Mich. App. 759, 766 , 400 N.W.2d 709, 713 (1986), or where the issue before the court was not “fully briefed and squarely decided” when the case was previously before the court. | 1 | 1 |
Bricker v. Cranegreen2 sentences1990“The essence of the doctrine of res judicata is that ‘a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive upon the parties in a subsequent litigation involving the same cause of action.’” Eastern Marine Const. Corp. v. First Southern Leasing, 129 N.H. 270, 273 , 525 A.2d 709, 711-12 (1987) (quoting Bricker v. Crane, 118 N.H. 249, 252-53 , 387 A.2d 321, 323 (1978)). 1990“The essence of the doctrine of res judicata is that ‘a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive upon the parties in a subsequent litigation involving the same cause of action.’” Eastern Marine Const. Corp. v. First Southern Leasing, 129 N.H. 270, 273 , 525 A.2d 709, 711-12 (1987) (quoting Bricker v. Crane, 118 N.H. 249, 252-53 , 387 A.2d 321, 323 (1978)). | 1 | 1 |
Security State Bank v. Gugelmangreen2 sentences1990Next, looking specifically at the law of the case doctrine, the general rule is that decisions of an appellate court “upon a former appeal [are] controlling only as to the actual point determined in that appeal.” Security State Bank, 230 Neb. at 845 , 434 N.W.2d at 292 ; see Southern Ry. 1990Next, looking specifically at the law of the case doctrine, the general rule is that decisions of an appellate court “upon a former appeal [are] controlling only as to the actual point determined in that appeal.” Security State Bank, 230 Neb. at 845 , 434 N.W.2d at 292 ; see Southern Ry. | 1 | 1 |
Lynch v. Grundygreen2 sentences1990The law of the case doctrine does not apply, however, where different evidence is presented on the subsequent appeal, see Lynch v. Grundy, 98 N.H. 282, 284 , 98 A.2d 160, 161 (1953); see also Barney v. Winona, &c., Railroad Co., 117 U.S. 228, 231 (1886); Perron v. Royal Oak Bd. of Ed., 155 Mich. App. 759, 766 , 400 N.W.2d 709, 713 (1986), or where the issue before the court was not “fully briefed and squarely decided” when the case was previously before the court. 1990The law of the case doctrine does not apply, however, where different evidence is presented on the subsequent appeal, see Lynch v. Grundy, 98 N.H. 282, 284 , 98 A.2d 160, 161 (1953); see also Barney v. Winona, &c., Railroad Co., 117 U.S. 228, 231 (1886); Perron v. Royal Oak Bd. of Ed., 155 Mich. App. 759, 766 , 400 N.W.2d 709, 713 (1986), or where the issue before the court was not “fully briefed and squarely decided” when the case was previously before the court. | 1 | 1 |
Nally v. Grace Community Churchgreen2 sentences1990Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 120-21; see Nolly, 253 Cal. Rptr. at 111-12 , 763 P.2d at 962 ; Sigurdson v. Isanti County, 448 N.W.2d 62, 64 (Minn. 1989); Security State Bank v. Gugelman, 230 Neb. 842, 845 , 434 N.W.2d 290, 292 (1989). 1990Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 120-21; see Nolly, 253 Cal. Rptr. at 111-12 , 763 P.2d at 962 ; Sigurdson v. Isanti County, 448 N.W.2d 62, 64 (Minn. 1989); Security State Bank v. Gugelman, 230 Neb. 842, 845 , 434 N.W.2d 290, 292 (1989). | 1 | 1 |
Sigurdson v. Isanti Countygreen2 sentences1990Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 120-21; see Nolly, 253 Cal. Rptr. at 111-12 , 763 P.2d at 962 ; Sigurdson v. Isanti County, 448 N.W.2d 62, 64 (Minn. 1989); Security State Bank v. Gugelman, 230 Neb. 842, 845 , 434 N.W.2d 290, 292 (1989). 1990Co. v. Kentucky, 284 U.S. 338, 341 (1932); Natty, 253 Cal. Rptr. at 111 , 763 P.2d at 962 ; Sigurdson, 448 N.W.2d at 64 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Hampshire. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Robinson
green
2 sentences2017Because our opinion in Robinson I determined only the legality of the key test and whether the warrantless entry into the defendant's home was justified by exigent circumstances, see Robinson I , 158 N.H. at 797 , 803 , 973 A.2d 277 , the law of the case doctrine did not bar the trial court from considering, upon remand, the additional arguments presented by the State in opposition to the defendant's motion to suppress. 2017Because our opinion in Robinson I determined only the legality of the key test and whether the warrantless entry into the defendant's home was justified by exigent circumstances, see Robinson I , 158 N.H. at 797 , 803 , 973 A.2d 277 , the law of the case doctrine did not bar the trial court from considering, upon remand, the additional arguments presented by the State in opposition to the defendant's motion to suppress. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
United States v. Ticchiarelli
green
1 sentence2017As the First Circuit has held, whether "there is a waiver depends not ... on counting the number of missed opportunities ... to raise an issue, but on whether the party had sufficient incentive to raise the issue in the prior proceedings." United States v. Ticchiarelli , 171 F.3d 24 , 32-33 (1st Cir. 1999). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
California v. Acevedo
green
2 sentences2017He contends that "[b]ecause Jones and Jardines are contrary to the rationale this Court relied on in the first appeal, the law of the case doctrine does not preclude reexamination of this issue." We will assume, without deciding, that the defendant has properly preserved this argument and that the cited cases would alter the conclusion that we reached in Robinson I that the key test was not an unreasonable search, but see California v. Acevedo , 500 U.S. 565 , 581, 111 S.Ct. 1982 , 114 L.Ed.2d 619 (1991) (Scalia, J., concurring) ("The Fourth Amendment does not by its terms require a prior warr 2017He contends that "[b]ecause Jones and Jardines are contrary to the rationale this Court relied on in the first appeal, the law of the case doctrine does not preclude reexamination of this issue." We will assume, without deciding, that the defendant has properly preserved this argument and that the cited cases would alter the conclusion that we reached in Robinson I that the key test was not an unreasonable search, but see California v. Acevedo , 500 U.S. 565 , 581, 111 S.Ct. 1982 , 114 L.Ed.2d 619 (1991) (Scalia, J., concurring) ("The Fourth Amendment does not by its terms require a prior warr | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Castillo v. United States
green
2 sentences2017The waiver doctrine, like the law of the case doctrine, "serves judicial economy by forcing parties to raise issues whose resolution might spare the court and parties later rounds of remands and appeals." United States v. Castillo , 179 F.3d 321 , 326 (5th Cir. 1999), rev'd on other grounds , 530 U.S. 120 , 120 S.Ct. 2090 , 147 L.Ed.2d 94 (2000) (citation and quotation omitted). 2017The waiver doctrine, like the law of the case doctrine, "serves judicial economy by forcing parties to raise issues whose resolution might spare the court and parties later rounds of remands and appeals." United States v. Castillo , 179 F.3d 321 , 326 (5th Cir. 1999), rev'd on other grounds , 530 U.S. 120 , 120 S.Ct. 2090 , 147 L.Ed.2d 94 (2000) (citation and quotation omitted). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
United States v. Jaime Castillo Brad Eugene Branch Renos Lenny Avraam Graeme Leonard Craddock Kevin A. Whitecliff
green
2 sentences2017The waiver doctrine, like the law of the case doctrine, "serves judicial economy by forcing parties to raise issues whose resolution might spare the court and parties later rounds of remands and appeals." United States v. Castillo , 179 F.3d 321 , 326 (5th Cir. 1999), rev'd on other grounds , 530 U.S. 120 , 120 S.Ct. 2090 , 147 L.Ed.2d 94 (2000) (citation and quotation omitted). 2017The waiver doctrine, like the law of the case doctrine, "serves judicial economy by forcing parties to raise issues whose resolution might spare the court and parties later rounds of remands and appeals." United States v. Castillo , 179 F.3d 321 , 326 (5th Cir. 1999), rev'd on other grounds , 530 U.S. 120 , 120 S.Ct. 2090 , 147 L.Ed.2d 94 (2000) (citation and quotation omitted). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Miller v. Bell
neutral
2 sentences2010Under the law of the case doctrine, the Powell court declined to reexamine the question whether a library district purported to have been created in 1978 remained in existence: Since the parties to this action are either the same parties or the successors to the parties litigants in Miller v. Bell, [ 453 S.W.2d 746 (Ky. 1970)], and, since the identity of this subject matter and that cause of action are identical, the law of the case rule is applicable. 2010Under the law of the case doctrine, the Powell court declined to reexamine the question whether a library district purported to have been created in 1978 remained in existence: Since the parties to this action are either the same parties or the successors to the parties litigants in Miller v. Bell, [ 453 S.W.2d 746 (Ky. 1970)], and, since the identity of this subject matter and that cause of action are identical, the law of the case rule is applicable. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Lange v. Nelson-Ryan Flight Service, Inc.
green
2 sentences1990Lange , 263 Minn, at 156, 116 N.W.2d at 269 . “[Adjudication aims at a correct decision, and if [an appellate court] is convinced that the first decision was palpably wrong, the doctrine of the law of the case [does] not preclude correction of the error.” Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 121; see Vallee v. Company, 89 N.H. 558, 558 , 199 A. 894, 894 (1938) (once questions of law are decided on appeal, they will not be reexamined upon a subsequent appeal unless equity and justice require it). 1990Lange , 263 Minn, at 156, 116 N.W.2d at 269 . “[Adjudication aims at a correct decision, and if [an appellate court] is convinced that the first decision was palpably wrong, the doctrine of the law of the case [does] not preclude correction of the error.” Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 0.404[1], at 121; see Vallee v. Company, 89 N.H. 558, 558 , 199 A. 894, 894 (1938) (once questions of law are decided on appeal, they will not be reexamined upon a subsequent appeal unless equity and justice require it). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.
green
1 sentence1990The purpose of the law of the case doctrine is to bar relitigation of settled issues, see Christianson, 108 S. Ct. at 2177 , not to deprive litigants of the opportunity to fully pursue or defend their positions. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.