Legal Opinion
Kingsbury v. Smith
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided March 10, 1982No. 81-150PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBatchelder, J.
This case, raising questions concerning whether New Hampshire recognizes a claim for “wrongful birth” and, if so, what damages may be considered by the trier of fact, comes to us from a certification of questions from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire (Devine, C.J.). The questions are:
“1. Under New Hampshire law, may recovery be had for the ‘wrongful birth’, i.e., the birth of a child which would not have occurred ‘but for’ the act or omission of the defendant tortfeasor?
2. If the answer to Question No. 1 is in the affirmative, what elements of damages are to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Custodio v. BauerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Troppi v. ScarfMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1983
- Jackson v. BumgardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Cockrum v. BaumgartnerIllinois Supreme Court · 1983
- Smith v. GoreTennessee Supreme Court · 1987
- Soto Cabral v. Estado Libre AsociadoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1995
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.