Surprenant v. MULCRONE

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that investigating and issuing a final GAL report are actions that are “‘integral to the judicial process,’ and [are] entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity”
• applying this standard to motion to dismiss based on quasi-judicial immunity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Nicole Alward v. Emery Johnston, M.D. & a.
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2018-12-21· cited 6×
• Signal Aviation Services, Inc. v. City of Lebanon
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2013-02-13· cited 3×
• Amour v. Collection Professionals, Inc.
  Montana Supreme Court· 2015-06-02· cited 2×
• Alberto Ramos v. Warden, New Hampshire State Prison
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2017-02-17· cited 2×
• Steven Dominic v. P Stephen R. Goldman, et al.
  D. New Hampshire· 2021-07-14· cited 1×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Dr. Gladys Cok v. Louis Cosentino
  First Circuit· 1989-06-05· cited 367×
• Beane v. Dana S. Beane & Co., P.C.
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2010-09-22· cited 76×
• McNamara v. Hersh
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2008-04-04· cited 15×
• Gould v. Director, New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1994-03-22· cited 9×
• Marr v. Maine Department of Human Services
  D. Maine· 2002-07-09· cited 4×