Leigh Mae Friedline & a. v. Eugene Roe, 166 N.H. 264 (2014)

Citation: Leigh Mae Friedline & a. v. Eugene Roe, 166 N.H. 264 (2014)
Parent Document: Leigh Mae Friedline & a. v. Eugene Roe, 166 N.H. 264 (2014)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2014-05-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2681753/leigh-mae-friedline-a-v-eugene-roe/ ↗

Full Text

1,052 chars

The filing of a plea of title in the district division does not immediately
halt the possessory proceedings. See Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 161 N.H. at 137
(referring to district court). Rather, we have explained that RSA 540:17
requires the defendant to promise to enter his action in the superior court for
the county and authorizes the district division to require that the defendant
post a monetary bond which may be unsecured or secured. Id. at 138. RSA
                                         3
540:18 provides that once such a promise is made by way of the entry of
recognizance, no further proceedings shall be had in the district division and
the action may be entered in the superior court. Id. Thus, when the plea of
title is raised in the district division and the defendant files such recognizance
as ordered by the court, the possessory action in the district division is stayed.
Id. at 137. If the defendant fails to enter his action in the superior court, then
the possessory proceedings in the district division may resume. See id. at 138.

Other Sections in This Document (26)

Full Text