N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. » N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. / Title lvi / Chapter 556
New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 556:1 (2024)

No Action Within Six Months, Etc

✓ 2024 N.H. RSA (Justia copy): later sessions are not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    556:1 No Action Within Six Months, Etc. – No action shall be sustained against an administrator if begun within six months after the original grant of administration, nor unless the demand has been exhibited to the administrator and payment has been demanded.

Source. RS 161:1. CS 170:1. GS 179:1. GL 198:1. PS 191:1. PL 302:1. RL 355:1. RSA 556:1. 1959, 114:1, eff. Jan. 1, 1960.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1956–2019 · leading case: Coffey v. Bresnahan, 506 A.2d 310 (N.H. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Coffey v. Bresnahan, 506 A.2d 310 (N.H. 1986). · cites it 12× “In this interlocutory transfer without ruling, we are asked to determine, inter alia, whether the statutes of limitations and prohibitions contained in RSA 556:1, :3, :5, and :11 bar the plaintiffs’ medical malpractice action against the defendant estate.”
Am. Policyholder's Ins. v. Baker, 409 A.2d 1346 (N.H. 1979). · cites it 9× “The issues are whether the administratrix of the estate of the insured legally waived the nonclaim provision of RSA 556:1, and whether such a waiver, if valid, violated the cooperation clause in the insured’s policy.”
In re Est. of Muriel R. Mills, 167 N.H. 125 (2014). · cites it 6× “” Thereafter, Financial Freedom did not file notice of a claim or present a demand to the petitioner pursuant to RSA 556:1, :3 (2007). On October 31, 2012, counsel for Financial Freedom sent a letter to the estate explaining that she had been instructed to foreclose on the…”
Saurman v. Liberty, 354 A.2d 132 (N.H. 1976). · cites it 9× “” After waiver of the requirements of RSA 556:1, formal demand was made on the administratrix on October 12, 1973, for payment of plaintiff’s claim.”
Davis v. Britton, 729 F. Supp. 189 (D.N.H. 1989). · cites it 3× “Our statute contains both short and long-term filing provisions, the former tied to administration of the estate, RSA 556:1 — :5, and the latter to the date of the decedent’s death, RSA 556:29.”
Stewart v. Farrel, 554 A.2d 1286 (N.H. 1989). · cites it 2× “RSA 556:1. Suits against an estate may be sustained only if notice of claim is properly exhibited.”
Lunderville v. Morse, 287 A.2d 612 (N.H. 1972). · cites it 3× “Park Goddard, to comply with RSA 556:1 (supp.), 3(supp.). This is an action in assumpsit seeking payment for certain shares of stock transferred to the defendants’ testator by the plaintiff.”
Frost v. Frost, 125 A.2d 656 (N.H. 1956). · cites it 2× “RSA 556:1, 3, provide that no action shall be sustained against an administrator unless a demand was exhibited *328 to him within one year after the original grant of administration and payment has been demanded.”
Heath v. Cleveland, 189 A.2d 488 (N.H. 1963). · cites it 2× “” RSA 556:1 (supp), (eff. Jan. 1, 1960); Hall v.”
In re Dockham Est., 227 A.2d 774 (N.H. 1967). · cites it 2× “that time does not run against the federal or a state government, ” and held that the plaintiff in that case, as an agency of the federal government, was immune from the operation of RSA 556:1, 3. At the same time, we pointed out that the statute is a “ nonclaim statute ” the…”
Stanley v. Clark, 159 F. Supp. 65 (D.N.H. 1957). · cites it 3× “It having been decided that the set-off statute does not apply, it remains to determine whether or not the counterclaim is an “action” prohibited by RSA 556:1, supra, if filed against an administrator within one year of the grant of administration.”
Chodakowski v. Piper, 414 A.2d 1295 (N.H. 1980). “However, the overall effect of the statute is to substantially reduce the time for bringing actions accruing less than four years preceding its effective date and to extend the time only for those accruing more than four years before its effective date.”
Show all 20 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.