modern rule in New Hampshire

1986While it is true that this court has recognized that a professional is not liable “for errors of judgment,” Leighton v. Sargent, 27 N.H. 460, 473 (1853), we think that the modern standard of care for professional malpractice is more clearly reflected in RSA 508:13, which provides in relevant part that: “[i]n determining whether the person against whom a malpractice claim has been made has met the applicable standard of care, the jury . . . shall consider only whether the person . .. has acted with due care having in mind the standards and recommended practices and procedures of his profession,

1986While it is true that this court has recognized that a professional is not liable “for errors of judgment,” Leighton v. Sargent, 27 N.H. 460, 473 (1853), we think that the modern standard of care for professional malpractice is more clearly reflected in RSA 508:13, which provides in relevant part that: “[i]n determining whether the person against whom a malpractice claim has been made has met the applicable standard of care, the jury . . . shall consider only whether the person . .. has acted with due care having in mind the standards and recommended practices and procedures of his profession,

1984See City of Concord v. Tompkins, supra at 471, 471 A.2d at 1157-58 .

1974This was a correct application of the modern rule in equity based upon an implied finding by the trial court that the defendant acted in good faith in making the improvements. “[T]he test of recovery is not how much the owner is enriched by the improvements, but how much he is unjustly enriched.”Madrid v. Spears, 250 F.2d 51, 54 (10th Cir. 1957); Wade, Restitution for Benefits Conferred Without Request, 19 Vand.

1974The modern standard for determination of competency of a witness, has been succinctly stated: “Competency depends on the witness’ capacity to observe, remember and narrate as well as an understanding of the duty to tell the truth.” United States v. Benn, 476 F.2d 1127, 1130 (D.C.