Legal Opinion
WMUR Channel Nine v. NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided August 3, 2006No. 2005-787PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGalway, J.
The petitioner, WMUR Channel Nine (WMUR), appeals an order of the Superior Court {Fitzgerald, J.) denying WMUR’s request for attorney’s fees after finding that the respondent violated the Right-to-Know Law, RSA chapter 91-A (2001 & Supp. 2005). The respondent, the New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game (department), cross-appeals the superior court’s ruling that the department violated RSA chapter 91-A. We affirm.
The record supports the following facts. In 1993, the department revoked John Hardwick’s hunting license after he shot and killed another hunter while deer hunting. In September…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wilkinson v. AustinSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Paul Conti and Conti Corporation (As Owner of F/v Providenza) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- State v. DellorfanoSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1986
- Pennsylvania Game Commission v. MarichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Appeal of the Town of NottinghamSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2006
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re Alexis O.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
- Appeal of Union Telephone Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
- Anderson v. Motorsports Holdings, LLCSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2007
- State v. CrieSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2006
- ATV Watch v. New Hampshire Department of Resources & Economic DevelopmentSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.