Harrington v. Metropolis Property Management Group, Inc., 162 N.H. 476 (2011)

Citation: Harrington v. Metropolis Property Management Group, Inc., 162 N.H. 476 (2011)
Parent Document: Harrington v. Metropolis Property Management Group, Inc., 162 N.H. 476 (2011)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2011-09-22
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8093357/harrington-v-metropolis-propert... ↗

Full Text

774 chars

The decision of the trial court to deny a motion to amend will not be overturned absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion. See Thomas v. Telegraph Publ’g Co., 155 N.H. 314, 320 (2007). Just over a month before trial, the petitioner moved to add parties and to extend discovery deadlines. The petitioner’s motion implied that it was prompted by new information discovered in a deposition days before, yet Hollis Commons Apartments, LLC was listed as the lessor on the lease and on both renewals. Under these circumstances, we cannot conclude that the trial court unsustainably exercised its discretion in denying the motion to amend the complaint. See id. at 320-21 (affirming trial court’s denial of motion to add parties on grounds of unnecessary delay and surprise).

Other Sections in This Document (26)

Full Text