Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Citation
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Parent Document
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Jurisdiction
- New Hampshire (state)
- Effective Date
- 2009-03-18
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2276277/zorn-v-demetri/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (29)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
- Zorn v. Demetri, 969 A.2d 464 (2009)
Full Text
898 charsWe conclude that read in the context of the statutory scheme and in light of the apparent legislative intent, the term “rental property” refers to other property subject to the statutory restrictions on security deposits. The legislature has determined that a person who rents one single-family residence and a person who rents for vacation purposes should not be required to comply with the statutory restrictions. Based upon our review of the entire statute, we conclude that the legislature did not intend for a person who participates in both exempt activities to lose the exemption. The statute as a whole evinces an intent to govern the rental of only residential premises with an exemption for a person who rents only one single-family residence. We believe that our construction of “rental property” is consistent with this statutory scheme and best conforms to the legislative intent. *441