Dobens v. Fagnant, 2025 N.H. 31 (2025)

Citation: Dobens v. Fagnant, 2025 N.H. 31 (2025)
Parent Document: Dobens v. Fagnant, 2025 N.H. 31 (2025)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2025-07-17
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10634920/dobens-v-fagnant/ ↗

Full Text

764 chars

[¶16] Finally, the plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred in failing to
award damages, costs, and fees under RSA 358-A:10 (2022). The trial court
found that “the defendant did not violate RSA 205-A, nor did he engage in an
unfair or deceptive trade practice,” and “[a]ccordingly, the plaintiffs are not
entitled to attorney’s fees and costs.” The trial court did not make any
additional findings regarding unfair or deceptive trade practices, or the
availability of remedies under RSA 358-A:10. Because we determine that the
defendant failed to comply with the notice provision of RSA 205-A:3, we
remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Reversed and remanded. MACDONALD, C.J., and BASSETT and DONOVAN, JJ., concurred. 5

Other Sections in This Document (24)

Full Text