Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Citation
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Parent Document
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Jurisdiction
- New Hampshire (state)
- Effective Date
- 2020-08-11
Other Sections in This Document (35)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
- Richard Horton & a. v. David Clemens & a. (2020)
Full Text
1,218 charsHANTZ MARCONI, J., concurring specially. Although I join the court’s opinion in full, I write separately to underscore what I take to be the limited nature of the opinion’s holding. The court does not hold today that the judiciary has free rein to legislate requirements for summary process actions in addition to those specified in RSA chapter 540. The court does not, for example, address whether the judiciary, under the auspices of RSA 490:26-d, could craft a standard eviction notice form that advised tenants as to the circumstances in which they may have a defense to eviction. See, e.g., RSA 540:13-a (2007) (establishing retaliation as a defense in possessory actions under certain circumstances). Rather, as the court notes, the language at issue does no more than inform tenants of the legal effect of the notice on which that language appears. Although the provision of such information, in this context, may be “necessary for the effective administration of justice,” RSA 490:26-d (2010), we ought not uncritically assume that everything that furthers the administration of justice is necessary therefor. Understanding the court’s opinion as not having done so in this case, I join that opinion in full. 7