“Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

Rahul Gogineni | The Subrogation Strategist | September 12, 2019 In Rankin v. South Street Downtown Holdings, Inc., 2019 N.H. LEXIS 165, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire considered, pursuant to a question transferred by the trial court, whether RSA 508:4-b, the statute of repose for improvements to real property, applies to indemnity and contribution claims. The… Continue reading “Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

“Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

Rahul Gogineni | White and Williams | September 3, 2019 In Rankin v. South Street Downtown Holdings, Inc., 2019 N.H. LEXIS 165, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire considered, pursuant to a question transferred by the trial court, whether RSA 508:4-b, the statute of repose for improvements to real property, applies to indemnity and contribution claims. The… Continue reading “Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

A Milestone Construction-Defect Case at New Hampshire Supreme Court

Boston Real Estate Times | August 16, 2019 Morrison Mahoney LLP, one of the northeast region’s leading litigation firms, announced that William A. Staar, a Partner in the firm’s Construction Litigation Practice, prevailed in a case before the New Hampshire Supreme Court (NHSC) on behalf of landscape architect, Wagner Hodgson, Inc. At issue was whether New Hampshire’s eight-year statute… Continue reading A Milestone Construction-Defect Case at New Hampshire Supreme Court

Contract Indemnity and Duty to Defend vs. Insurance Duty to Defend

Stan Martin | Commonsense Construction Law LLC | June 10, 2016 A New Hampshire court has issued a thoughtful decision on the duty to defend arising from an indemnity obligation in a design contract. The court distinguished between the duty to defend often invoked for insurance coverage, from a duty to defend expressed in a… Continue reading Contract Indemnity and Duty to Defend vs. Insurance Duty to Defend

%d bloggers like this: