Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Miller v. Slania Enterprises, Inc., 150 N.H. 655 (2004)

Citation
Miller v. Slania Enterprises, Inc., 150 N.H. 655 (2004)
Parent Document
Miller v. Slania Enterprises, Inc., 150 N.H. 655 (2004)
Jurisdiction
New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date
2004-03-15

Other Sections in This Document (39)

Full Text

1,289 chars
The landlord first argues that the trial court erred by awarding damages under a theory not pled by the plaintiff. The landlord contends that the court erroneously allowed the plaintiff to constructively amend his pleadings to allege a violation of RSA 540:13, VII. -See RSA 514:9 (1997). The landlord did not object either to the introduction of evidence related to the landlord’s compliance with RSA 540:13, VII, or to the plaintiffs arguments at the close of the evidence addressing the same issue. The landlord was then allowed to file a post-trial memorandum of law in which it again raised no objection and instead addressed the issue on the merits. Cf. Penrich, Inc. v. Sullivan, 140 N.H. 583, 590 (1995) (issues should be raised at earliest possible time before trial court). Furthermore, neither below nor on appeal has the landlord identified any evidence that it was precluded from introducing; nor has it otherwise demonstrated any unfair prejudice resulting from the court’s consideration of this issue. Accordingly, we find no reversible error. Cf. Kravitz v. Beech Hill Hosp., 148 N.H. 383, 393 (2002) (holding that trial court erred by allowing *660amendment of pleadings when proposed amendment introduced new cause of action not referred to by either party during trial).