application of a legal standard (New Hampshire) · Go Syfert
← New Hampshire issues

application of a legal standard in New Hampshire

9 New Hampshire opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2023 1 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
State v. Fordgreen
nh · 1999 · cited in 5 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2003–2019
2 sentences

2015“Because the ultimate determination of custody requires an application of a legal standard to historical facts, it is not merely a factual question but a mixed question of law and fact.” State v. Ford, 144 N.H. 57, 62 (1999).

2007“Because the ultimate determination of custody requires an application-of a legal standard to historical facts, it is not merely a factual question but a mixed question of law and fact.” State v. Ford, 144 N.H. 57, 62 (1999).

35
State v. Jenningsgreen
nh · 2007 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016“Because the ultimate determination of custody requires an application of a legal standard to historical facts, it is not merely a factual question but a mixed question of law and fact.” State v. Jennings, 155 N.H. 768, 772 (2007) (quotation omitted).

2016“We will not overturn the trial court’s factual findings relevant to the question of custody unless they are contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.” Id. at 772-73 .

11
Great Lakes Aircraft Co. v. City of Claremontgreen
nh · 1992 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999Cf. Great Lakes Aircraft Co. v. City of Claremont, 135 N.H. 270, 282 , 608 A.2d 840, 848 (1992).

1999Cf. Great Lakes Aircraft Co. v. City of Claremont, 135 N.H. 270, 282 , 608 A.2d 840, 848 (1992).

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 (3)

CaseCitedYears
State of New Hampshire v. Timothy McKenna green
nh · 2014
2 sentences

2023Id.

2019In a custody analysis, " 'the crucial question entails an evaluation made after determination of the historical facts: if encountered by a "reasonable person," would the identified circumstances add up to custody as defined in Miranda ?' " State v. Ford , 144 N.H. 57 , 63, 738 A.2d 937 (1999) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane , 516 U.S. 99 , 113, 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995) ) (brackets omitted). "[A]lthough we will not overturn the factual findings unless they are contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, we review the ultimate determination of custody de novo ." McKenna , 166 N.H

22019–2023
State v. Katlyn Marin green
nh · 2019
1 sentence

2020Marin, 172 N.H. at 160 .

12020–2020
Thompson v. Keohane green
scotus · 1995
2 sentences

2019In a custody analysis, " 'the crucial question entails an evaluation made after determination of the historical facts: if encountered by a "reasonable person," would the identified circumstances add up to custody as defined in Miranda ?' " State v. Ford , 144 N.H. 57 , 63, 738 A.2d 937 (1999) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane , 516 U.S. 99 , 113, 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995) ) (brackets omitted). "[A]lthough we will not overturn the factual findings unless they are contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, we review the ultimate determination of custody de novo ." McKenna , 166 N.H

2019In a custody analysis, " 'the crucial question entails an evaluation made after determination of the historical facts: if encountered by a "reasonable person," would the identified circumstances add up to custody as defined in Miranda ?' " State v. Ford , 144 N.H. 57 , 63, 738 A.2d 937 (1999) (quoting Thompson v. Keohane , 516 U.S. 99 , 113, 116 S.Ct. 457 , 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995) ) (brackets omitted). "[A]lthough we will not overturn the factual findings unless they are contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, we review the ultimate determination of custody de novo ." McKenna , 166 N.H

12019–2019

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NH § N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 632-A:2 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

SD 83 (1991–2026) CA 32 (1971–2026) UT 28 (1994–2026) MI 22 (2000–2023) CT 16 (1995–2025) WI 14 (1983–2008) CO 12 (1984–2017) AZ 10 (1949–2026) AR 9 (2014–2024) NH 9 (1999–2023) AK 7 (1986–2013) TX 7 (1946–2021) IL 5 (2001–2018) OK 5 (1919–1987) DC 5 (1976–2011) NV 4 (2010–2021) MD 4 (1998–2016) OR 4 (2000–2025) FL 2 (1978–2003) GA 2 (2019–2019) NM 2 (2023–2023) DE 2 (1989–1997) NJ 2 (1997–2018) MO 2 (1985–1992)

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