N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. » N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. / Title lii / Chapter 508
New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4 (2026)

Personal Actions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    508:4 Personal Actions. –
I. Except as otherwise provided by law, all personal actions, except actions for slander or libel, may be brought only within 3 years of the act or omission complained of, except that when the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission were not discovered and could not reasonably have been discovered at the time of the act or omission, the action shall be commenced within 3 years of the time the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission complained of.
II. Personal actions for slander or libel, unless otherwise provided by law, may be brought only within 3 years of the time the cause of action accrued.

Source. RS 181:3, 4. CS 192:3, 4. GS 202:3. GL 221:3. PS 217:3. PL 329:3. 1937, 21:1. RL 385:3. RSA 508:4. 1969, 378:1. 1981, 514:1. 1986, 227:12, eff. July 1, 1986.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 396 cases (49 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: Black Bear Lodge v. Trillium Corp., 620 A.2d 428 (N.H. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Black Bear Lodge v. Trillium Corp., 620 A.2d 428 (N.H. 1993). · cites it 11× “The issues on appeal are whether the statute of limitations “discovery rule” found in RSA 508:4, I (Supp. 1992) applies to contract actions, and whether the plaintiff adequately pled reasonable diligence in discovering the causal connection between its injuries and an act or…”
Kelleher v. Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co., 891 A.2d 477 (N.H. 2005). · cites it 5× “With respect to the strict liability claim, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff knew that one of the windows contained rot as early as 1996, and, therefore, even if the discovery rule exception to RSA 508:4, I (1997) applied, the plaintiff still failed to timely file this…”
Monica Anderson v. Est. of Mary D. Wood, 198 A.3d 926 (N.H. 2018). · cites it 13× “Wood, as time-barred by RSA 508:4 (2010). We reverse and remand. The following facts are taken from the trial court's orders; the procedural history is taken from the record before us.”
Billewicz v. Ransmeier, 13 A.3d 116 (N.H. 2010). · cites it 14× “See RSA 564-B:10-1005(c)(l) (2007); RSA 508:4 (2010). We affirm. The following facts are not in dispute.”
Big League Ent., Inc. v. Brox Indus., Inc., 821 A.2d 1054 (N.H. 2003). · cites it 6× “See RSA 508:4, I (1997). The plaintiff countered that its claim was subject to an eight-year statute of limitations, see RSA 508:4-b, I (1997), or, alternatively, that the discovery rule of RSA *482 508:4, I, applied and, accordingly, that its claims were timely filed under that…”
Sykes v. RBS Citizens, N.A., 2 F. Supp. 3d 128 (D.N.H. 2014). · cites it 8× “Statutes of Limitations The mortgage defendants argue that Sykes’s claims for breach of contract (Count I) and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Count VIII) against them are time-barred under *140 RSA 508:4. 12 They also argue that Sykes’s claim for…”
Sinclair v. Brill, 815 F. Supp. 44 (D.N.H. 1993). · cites it 14× “Nevertheless, the language of New Hampshire’s statute codifies a “discovery rule,” and therefore expresses the state’s interest in allowing plaintiffs to file suit “when the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission were not discovered ■and could not reasonably…”
Moore v. Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc., 848 F. Supp. 2d 107 (D.N.H. 2012). · cites it 4× “§ 1640 (e), in the case of the Moores’ federal law claims; and New Hampshire’s general three-year statute of limitations in the case of them state-law claims, see N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 508:4, I. The court agrees.”
Kleen Laundry & Dry Cleaning Servs., Inc. v. Total Waste Mgmt. Corp., 817 F. Supp. 225 (D.N.H. 1993). · cites it 10× “In addition, the defendant has moved for summary judgment in its favor on the plaintiffs claims based on the defendant’s alleged conduct at the site, arguing that those claims are barred by the New Hampshire statute of limitations, N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 508:4 (Supp.1991). The…”
McCollum v. D'Arcy, 638 A.2d 797 (N.H. 1994). · cites it 8× “The trial court denied the motion, concluding that the statutory formulation of the discovery rule, RSA 508:4,1 (Supp. 1993), applies to the facts at bar.”
Plaisted v. LaBrie, 70 A.3d 447 (N.H. 2013). · cites it 7× “See RSA 508:4 (2010). The plaintiff objected, arguing that, pursuant to Shuris v.”
Beane v. Dana S. Beane & Co., P.C., 7 A.3d 1284 (N.H. 2010). · cites it 3× “Here, the trial court properly applied the current version of RSA 508:4, which provides in pertinent part: Except as otherwise provided by law, all personal actions, except actions for slander or libel, may be brought only within 3 years of the act or omission complained of,…”
Show all 396 citing cases →
— N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4(1) — 3 cases
Pure Distributors, Inc. v. Baker, 285 F.3d 150 (1st Cir. 2002).
Falkenrath v. Candela Corp., 2016 UT App 76 (Utah Ct. App. 2016).
Bordner v. Fed. Deposit Ins., 145 F.R.D. 13 (D.N.H. 1992).
— N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4(I) — 8 cases
Christopher M. Elwell v. P Ed Correia, Bryant Scott, & Matthew Dustin, 2022 DNH 004 (D.N.H. 2022).
Alex Jeanty v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., et al., 2021 DNH 061 (D.N.H. 2021).
Jeanty v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., Tr. (D.N.H. 2020).
Jeanty v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., Tr. (D.N.H. 2021).
Elwell v. Doe 1 (D.N.H. 2022).
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.