Melissa Natal v. GMPM Company & a. (2022)

Citation: Melissa Natal v. GMPM Company & a. (2022)
Parent Document: Melissa Natal v. GMPM Company & a. (2022)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2022-04-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6456928/melissa-natal-v-gmpm-company-a/ ↗

Full Text

955 chars

The plaintiff, on the other hand, argues that the property was not a
shared facility. In her view, the circuit court correctly concluded that she was
“a normal tenant” entitled to the protections for tenants set forth in RSA
chapters 540 and 540-A. Because RSA chapter 540 is “part of the same overall
statutory scheme” as RSA chapter 540-A, we examine the definitions of
“tenant” set forth in both chapters. Anderson v. Robitaille, 172 N.H. 20, 23
(2019). RSA 540-A:1, II defines “tenant” as “a person to whom a landlord rents
or leases residential premises.” RSA 540-A:1, II (2021). RSA 540:1-a, IV
provides that “[t]he term ‘tenant’ or ‘tenancy’ shall not include occupants” of
certain premises and that the provisions of RSA chapter 540 “shall not apply”
to those certain premises. RSA 540:1-a, IV. As relevant here, RSA 540:1-a,
IV(e) specifically excludes the occupants of “[r]esidential real estate under RSA
540-B” from the definition of “tenant.”

Other Sections in This Document (26)

Full Text