DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Weeks v. Five Bros. Mtg., 2013 DNH 068 (2014)

Citation
Weeks v. Five Bros. Mtg., 2013 DNH 068 (2014)
Parent Document
Weeks v. Five Bros. Mtg., 2013 DNH 068 (2014)
Jurisdiction
New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date
2014-04-09
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10695256/weeks-v-five-bros-mtg/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (154)

Full Text

498 chars 
3
      The defendants suggest in a footnote that RSA 540 may not
apply to them because U.S. Bank did not rent the Manchester
House. To the extent the defendants intended to argue that the
portion of Count I based on RSA 540 should be dismissed because
the statute does not apply to them, that argument was not
sufficiently developed to be addressed. See Higgins v . New
Balance Athletic Shoes, Inc., 194 F.3d 2 5 2 , 260 (1st Cir. 1999);
United States v . Zannino, 895 F.2d 1 , 17 (1st Cir. 1990).