Woodstock Soapstone Co. v. Carleton, 133 N.H. 809 (1991)

Citation: Woodstock Soapstone Co. v. Carleton, 133 N.H. 809 (1991)
Parent Document: Woodstock Soapstone Co. v. Carleton, 133 N.H. 809 (1991)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 1991-01-28
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8090733/woodstock-soapstone-co-v-carleton/ ↗

Full Text

1,044 chars

Woodstock contends that the superior court should have awarded attorney’s fees, based on the provision in the lease stating that the court may assess the winning party’s fees to the losing party in the event of litigation. The record supports the court’s conclusion that this lease provision was permissive rather than mandatory. The record also supports the superior court’s finding that there was no bad faith which would justify an award of attorney’s fees to Woodstock. Woodstock was not forced to litigate to secure a clearly defined and established right. See Harkeem v. Adams, 117 N.H. 687, 691, 377 A.2d 617, 619 (1977). There was a genuine dispute regarding lease payments and the assignment of the purchase option, and there is no evidence that this action was pursued without reasonable basis in the facts or claim of law. See Town of Nottingham v. Bonser, 131 N.H. 120, 132, 552 A.2d 58, 65 (1988), cert. denied, 109 S. Ct. 3163 (1989). Accordingly, we affirm the superior court’s denial of an award of attorney’s fees to Woodstock.

Other Sections in This Document (33)

Full Text