Legal Opinion

City of Portsmouth v. Schlesinger

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 12, 1996No. 95-399PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit {Young, J.) has certified to us the following question of law, see SUP. CT. R. 34, concerning a promissory note executed by the defendants, Richard Schlesinger and William Weinstein (the developers), in favor of the plaintiff, the City of Portsmouth (the city):

*734Are the statutes of limitation set forth in RSA 677:2 and :4 applicable to the so-called “illegality” defense raised by the Developers in the instant case?

For the reasons stated below, we conclude that the defendant’s affirmative defense of illegality is not subject to, nor…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. City of Portsmouth New Hampshire v. Richard Schlesinger and William WeinsteinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
  2. City of Portsmouth v. Richard Schlesinger and William WeinsteinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. North Country Environmental Services, Inc. v. Town of BethlehemSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001
  2. City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire v. Richard Schlesinger and William WeinsteinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API