Atherton's Furniture v. Halperin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Atherton's Furniture v. Halperin

453 A.2d 1268, 122 N.H. 1000, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 510

CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire

DecidedDecember 8, 1982

DocketNo. 82-308

StatusPublished

This text of 453 A.2d 1268 (Atherton's Furniture v. Halperin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Atherton's Furniture v. Halperin, 453 A.2d 1268, 122 N.H. 1000, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 510 (N.H. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion

The State of Maine seeks to impose upon the plaintiff, a business located in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, a use tax for tangible personal property which the plaintiff sold to residents of the State of Maine. The plaintiff filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the Rockingham County Superior Court asserting that the Maine tax law violated the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. U.S. Const, art. I, § 8. The State of Maine filed a motion to dismiss based, in part, upon forum non conveniens. The Master (Charles T. Gallagher, Esq.) recommended and the Superior Court (Contas, J.) approved the dismissal of the petition.

We conclude that the factors set forth in Leeper v. Leeper, 116 N.H. 116, 354 A.2d 137 (1976), were properly considered and balanced by the master. These factors are: the private interests of the litigants, the relative ease of access to sources of proof, the availability of compulsory process, the cost of obtaining the attendance of willing witnesses, the enforceability of a New Hampshire judgment, and other concerns relating to the public interest. Id. at 118, 354 A.2d at 139 (citing Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508 (1947)). We see no reason to doubt the ability of our sister State’s judiciary to decide properly a question of federal constitutional law.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Memorandum Opinion

The State of Maine seeks to impose upon the plaintiff, a business located in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, a use tax for tangible personal property which the plaintiff sold to residents of the State of Maine. The plaintiff filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the Rockingham County Superior Court asserting that the Maine tax law violated the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. U.S. Const, art. I, § 8. The State of Maine filed a motion to dismiss based, in part, upon forum non conveniens. The Master (Charles T. Gallagher, Esq.) recommended and the Superior Court (Contas, J.) approved the dismissal of the petition.

We conclude that the factors set forth in Leeper v. Leeper, 116 N.H. 116, 354 A.2d 137 (1976), were properly considered and balanced by the master. These factors are: the private interests of the litigants, the relative ease of access to sources of proof, the availability of compulsory process, the cost of obtaining the attendance of willing witnesses, the enforceability of a New Hampshire judgment, and other concerns relating to the public interest. Id. at 118, 354 A.2d at 139 (citing Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508 (1947)). We see no reason to doubt the ability of our sister State’s judiciary to decide properly a question of federal constitutional law.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

453 A.2d 1268, 122 N.H. 1000, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/athertons-furniture-v-halperin-nh-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack