erred standard (New Hampshire) · Go Syfert
← New Hampshire issues

erred standard in New Hampshire

12 New Hampshire opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2025 6 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
In Re Connergreen
nh · 2007 · cited in 9 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2016–2025
2 sentences

2025In the Matter of Conner & Conner, 156 N.H. at 252 . [¶14] The Right-to-Know Law requires the necessary accommodation of competing interests.

2024Id.

19
State v. Russellgreen
nh · 2009 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016Under the third prong, evidence of other, uncharged bad acts “is admissible if the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant does not substantially outweigh the probative value of the evidence.” Russell, 159 N.H. at 485 (quotation omitted).

11
State v. Lambertgreen
nh · 2001 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007See Lambert, 147 N.H. at 296 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Hampshire. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Buzzard v. F.F. Enterprises green
nh · 2010
1 sentence

2019Id. 2 Although, in his brief, the plaintiff represents that he would have argued in his objection to the motion to dismiss that the statute of limitations should be equitably tolled, his motion for additional time did not say this.

12019–2019
State v. Smalley green
nh · 2004
1 sentence

2016Cf. Smalley, 151 N.H. at 196 . *500 The defendant next argues that the court erred in its analysis under the third prong of Rule 404(b).

12016–2016

Where else courts name it

CA 32 (1903–2025) OH 25 (1984–2019) TX 17 (1890–2025) IL 16 (1906–2023) PA 14 (1842–2024) NH 12 (2007–2025) OK 12 (1899–2010) NC 10 (1925–2025) NY 8 (1899–2016) GA 7 (1881–2024) WA 6 (1983–2024) NM 5 (1948–2021) CT 5 (1917–2025) MO 5 (1872–2001) KY 4 (1930–2012) FL 4 (1907–2008) TN 4 (2005–2025) AZ 4 (1962–2010) MI 4 (1887–2025) AL 3 (1976–2014) WV 3 (1882–2025) NE 3 (1957–2019) NJ 3 (2020–2025) AR 3 (1913–1919) IA 3 (1858–1969) MN 2 (1986–2006) IN 2 (1917–1936) LA 2 (1989–2011) WI 2 (1908–2022) ME 2 (1991–1996) CO 2 (2025–2025) UT 2 (2021–2024) OR 2 (1971–1983) WY 2 (1995–2023)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check