Orford Teachers Ass'n v. Watson

451 A.2d 378, 122 N.H. 803, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 467
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedSeptember 8, 1982
DocketNo. 81-474
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 451 A.2d 378 (Orford Teachers Ass'n v. Watson) 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
Orford Teachers Ass'n v. Watson, 451 A.2d 378, 122 N.H. 803, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 467 (N.H. 1982).

Opinions

Memorandum Opinion

The only question before us is whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees under RSA 91-A:8 (Supp. 1981).

Subsequent to our decision in Orford Teachers Assoc. v. Watson, 121 N.H. 118, 427 A.2d 21 (1981), the plaintiff teachers association filed in superior court a “Motion to Grant Access to Minutes and Award Attorney’s Fees.” The trial court, on May 1, 1981, entered the following order: “Atty. Kidder having no objection, request to allow inspection of executive session minutes ... is granted.”

A hearing on that part of the motion regarding the award of attorney’s fees was held on November 19, 1981. The Superior Court {Johnson, J.) recognized that this aspect of the case was governed by RSA 91-A:8 (Supp. 1981) which provides that one refusing access to public records may be liable for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs “at the discretion of the court.” (Emphasis added.) The court found that “given all the facts and circumstances of this case, that the award of attorney’s fees is not justified and hence, the plaintiff’s petition is denied. Exceptions noted.”

[804]*804 On this appeal, the parties have failed to provide us with a transcript of the motion hearing and our review is therefore limited to determining whether there are errors of law apparent on the face of the record. Baker v. Dennis Brown Realty, 121 N.H. 640, 644, 433 A.2d 1271, 1273 (1981). Because no abuse of discretion on the part of the court appears on the record before us, our order is

Appeal dismissed; affirmed.

Douglas, J., dissented.

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

Related

Perron v. Aranosian
508 A.2d 1087 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1986)
Sanborn v. Sanborn
465 A.2d 888 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1983)
Cote v. Cote
461 A.2d 566 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1983)
Chase v. Avigdor
451 A.2d 1313 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
451 A.2d 378, 122 N.H. 803, 1982 N.H. LEXIS 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/orford-teachers-assn-v-watson-nh-1982.