three-factor test (New Hampshire) · Go Syfert
← New Hampshire issues

three-factor test in New Hampshire

10 New Hampshire opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2023 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. KOREAN METHODIST CHURCHgreen
nh · 2008 · cited in 3 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2009–2021
2 sentences

2021However, Torromeo “neither cites nor discusses the foregoing three-factor analysis, and points to no controlling precedent establishing that, in the face of the process that [Torromeo] indisputably received, it also had a right to an evidentiary hearing in superior court.” Korean Methodist Church of N.H., 157 N.H. at 258 (quotation and citation omitted).

2009Because the juvenile “neither cites nor discusses the foregoing three-factor analysis,” State v. Korean Methodist Church of N.H., 157 N.H. 254, 258 (2008) (quotation omitted), we consider his argument that he has a constitutional right to counsel in a CHINS proceeding undeveloped and decline to review it.

33
No. 06-1826green
ca1 · 2007 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Thus, reading these two subsections together, as to state law claims, “subsection (c)(1) only protects from liability (1) a provider or user of an interactive computer service (2) whom a plaintiff seeks to treat, under a state law cause of action, as a publisher or speaker (3) of information provided by another information content provider.” Id. at 1100-01 (footnote omitted); see Lycos, Inc., 478 F.3d at 418 (construing subsections (c)(1) and (e)(3), and setting forth the same three-factor test).

11
Appeal of the Town of Nottinghamgreen
nh · 2006 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008The Church “neither cites nor discusses the foregoing three-factor analysis,” Appeal of Town of Nottingham, 153 N.H. at 552, and points to no controlling precedent establishing that, in the face of the process that the Church indisputably received, it also had a right to an evidentiary hearing in superior court.

11
Gonzaga University v. Doegreen
scotus · 2002 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273, 282 (2002) (quotations omitted).

11
State v. Vincentgreen
nh · 1994 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996See Vincent, 139 N.H. at 48, 49 , 648 A.2d at 480, 481 ; Dedrick, 135 N.H. at 505 , 607 A.2d at 129 .

1996See Vincent, 139 N.H. at 48, 49 , 648 A.2d at 480, 481 ; Dedrick, 135 N.H. at 505 , 607 A.2d at 129 .

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
State v. McGurk green
nh · 2008
2 sentences

2023We note that in McGurk, we concluded that we had no need to discuss the first and third factors of the three-factor test, concluding that the second factor was “sufficient to purge the taint.” McGurk, 157 N.H. at 771 .

2023We note that in McGurk, we concluded that we had no need to discuss the first and third factors of the three-factor test, concluding that the second factor was “sufficient to purge the taint.” McGurk, 157 N.H. at 771 .

22023–2023
Graves v. Estabrook green
nh · 2003
1 sentence

2007Graves, 149 N.H. at 204 .

12007–2007
Blessing v. Freestone green
scotus · 1997
1 sentence

2007The plaintiff concedes that this is a case of first impression, but argues that it meets the criteria established by the United States Supreme Court for determining whether a particular statute or regulation creates a right that is enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . *595 The plaintiff cites the Blessing test, see Blessing v. Freestone, 520 U.S. 329 (1997), a three-factor inquiry to guide the determination of whether a statute establishes such a right: [1] Congress must have intended that the provision benefit the plaintiff, [2] the plaintiff must demonstrate that the right assertedly protect

12007–2007
Dillon v. Legg green
cal · 1968
1 sentence

2007We employ the three-factor test set out in Dillon v. Legg, 441 P.2d 912 (Cal. 1968), to determine whether the harm was foreseeable.

12007–2007
State v. Dedrick green
nh · 1992
2 sentences

1996See Vincent, 139 N.H. at 48, 49 , 648 A.2d at 480, 481 ; Dedrick, 135 N.H. at 505 , 607 A.2d at 129 .

1996See Vincent, 139 N.H. at 48, 49 , 648 A.2d at 480, 481 ; Dedrick, 135 N.H. at 505 , 607 A.2d at 129 .

11996–1996

Where else courts name it

TX 97 (1972–2026) AL 73 (1978–2024) PA 57 (1982–2024) ID 44 (1980–2024) MI 43 (1976–2025) CA 43 (1965–2025) CO 36 (1984–2026) NJ 32 (1990–2026) IL 29 (1988–2025) MN 28 (1981–2025) WA 26 (2001–2024) NV 22 (2006–2022) NM 21 (1987–2026) WI 20 (1995–2024) KS 20 (1983–2022) VI 16 (2014–2025) IN 16 (1984–2025) OH 15 (1999–2025) GA 15 (1996–2023) IA 14 (1984–2024) LA 14 (1994–2026) MS 14 (1994–2025) MO 14 (1985–2021) MD 12 (1988–2026) HI 12 (1978–2025) WV 12 (1988–2023) MT 11 (1998–2024) CT 11 (1985–2021) AZ 11 (1986–2022) NY 11 (1994–2026) NH 10 (1996–2023) DE 10 (2015–2025) OR 10 (1982–2025) NC 9 (2015–2025) AR 9 (2004–2024) UT 8 (2004–2022) MA 8 (2000–2025) TN 7 (1999–2024) FL 7 (2001–2026) VT 5 (2000–2025) ME 4 (1989–2020) VA 4 (2002–2025) SC 4 (2009–2023) NE 4 (1991–2016) WY 3 (1992–2026) KY 3 (2018–2024) SD 3 (1997–2024) DC 3 (1983–2021) ND 2 (2016–2022) OK 2 (1999–2010) AK 2 (1996–2025)

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