Lorette v. Peter-Sam Investment Properties
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1DissentBatchelder, J.
The majority holds that RSA 215-A:34, II (1989) affords the defendants immunity from suit for the plaintiff’s injuries. I disagree, however, that this statute limits the liability of the owners of a sand and gravel excavation pit.
Recreational use statutes are in derogation of the common law and should be narrowly construed. Kantner v. Combustion Engineering, 701 F. Supp. 943, 946 (D.N.H. 1988). Their purpose, as expressed in the legislative history of our generic recreational use statute, RSA 508:14, I (Supp. 1994), is to limit the liability of “people whose land is donated for . . .…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ferres v. City of New RochelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Kantner v. Combustion EngineeringDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1988
- Noel v. Town of OgunquitSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989