N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. » N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. / Title li / Chapter 491
New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 491:7 (2026)

Jurisdiction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    491:7 Jurisdiction. – The superior court shall take cognizance of civil actions and pleas, real, personal, and mixed, according to the course of the common law, except such actions as are required to be brought in the family division under RSA 490-D, district courts under RSA 502-A, or the probate courts under RSA 547; of writs of mandamus and quo warranto and of proceedings in relation thereto; of petition and appeals relating to highways and property taken therefor and for other public use; of actions commenced in the probate or district courts where a right to jury trial is guaranteed by the constitution; of actions commenced in a district court which are transferable by statute to the superior court; of suits in equity under RSA 498:1; of petitions for new trials; of petitions for the redemption and foreclosure of mortgages; of all other proceedings and matters to be entered in, or heard at, said court by special provisions of law; and of all other proceedings and matters cognizable therein for which other special provision is not made.

Source. RS 172:3, 5. 1855, 1659:2. 1859, 2211:3. GS 189:3. 1870, 2:1. GL 208:3. 1885, 13:1; 42:1. PS 204:4. 1901, 78:2. PL 316:6. RL 370:6. RSA 491:7. 1957, 244:6. 1963, 331:2. 1965, 327:4. 1973, 145:10. 1975, 395:4. 1992, 284:11, eff. Jan. 1, 1993. 2014, 204:31, eff. July 11, 2014.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1963–2024 · leading case: In re Nelson, 825 A.2d 501 (N.H. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Nelson, 825 A.2d 501 (N.H. 2003). · cites it 3× “I believe it is unnecessary to address that contention at this time, and thus, contrary to the majority’s apprehension, I would not hold here that persons in loco parentis are entitled to the same constitutional protections as natural or adoptive parents.”
Samuel Rogers v. Joseph Rogers, 203 A.3d 85 (N.H. 2019). “" RSA 491:7 (Supp. 2018). Determining the jurisdiction of the probate court is a matter of statutory interpretation which presents a question of law subject to our de novo review.”
Locke v. Ladd, 399 A.2d 962 (N.H. 1979). · cites it 3× “1977) to issue orders relating to child support and visitation rights.”
Ellsworth v. Heath, 678 A.2d 138 (N.H. 1996). · cites it 4× “The general jurisdictional power conferred on the superior court by part II, article 72-a of the New Hampshire Constitution is defined in RSA 491:7, which provides: The superior court shall take cognizance of civil actions and pleas, real, personal and mixed, according to the…”
Douglas v. Douglas, 728 A.2d 215 (N.H. 1999). “In equity proceedings such as divorce, see RSA 491:7, :14 (1997), actions that would constitute a default at law technically result in a judgment pro confesso in equity.”
Robbins v. Kalwall Corp., 417 A.2d 4 (N.H. 1980). · cites it 2× “In her petition for discovery filed against her employer, she asserts that the employer and its workmen’s compensation insurance carrier have refused to permit her to examine the oven to determine the manufacturer’s name and possible liability.”
In re Cigna Healthcare, Inc., 777 A.2d 884 (N.H. 2001). “We hold the statutory provision that the superior court will take “cognizance” of matters in the probate court for which there is a right to trial by jury did not deprive litigants of the right to apply for relief in superior court without first applying for the same relief in…”
Woodstock Soapstone Co. v. Carleton, 585 A.2d 312 (N.H. 1991). “RSA 491:7, 498:1, :2; see King v. Thomson, 116 N.”
Brennan v. Winnipesaukee Flagship Corp., 446 A.2d 1175 (N.H. 1982). · cites it 2× “1981) and requested injunctive relief pursuant to RSA 491:7. After an initial hearing in the superior court, the Master ( Robert A.”
Gray v. Seidel, 726 A.2d 1283 (N.H. 1999). · cites it 2× “The court ruled, however, that it lacked jurisdiction to determine whether maintaining a dock is a reasonable use of the plaintiffs’ property rights as granted in the easement because the *330 authority to regulate docks is vested in other State and local authorities.”
Cooperman v. MacNeil, 465 A.2d 879 (N.H. 1983). “” *700 In this appeal, MacNeil challenges, for the first time, the superior court’s jurisdiction to grant possessory relief.”
State v. Moquin, 191 A.2d 541 (N.H. 1963). · cites it 2× “*13 RSA 490:4; RSA 491:7, 19, 20; RSA 498:1. Probate courts have limited and special jurisdiction only so far as granted by the Legislature.”
Show all 29 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.