Case Results

Husband and Wife were killed in a motor vehicle – Settlement after suit filed - $1,250,000

Gender discrimination under Title VII - U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, Total Verdict - $1,168,500

A combined verdict of $983,000 for the estate of an elderly woman, and her surviving spouse, where the woman with diabetes had been hospitalized for a heart procedure, suffered an episode of hypoglycemia during her hospitalization, was improperly treated for the hypoglycemia by being given an intravenous dose of D50 in her hand, which extravasated into the vein in her hand, causing a wound in her hand which then contracted MRSA. Ultimately, the woman had the fingers on her hand amputated one at a time, and then passed away as a result of the MRSA infection.

Settled a workplace injury lawsuit related to carbon monoxide exposure, leading to compensation for the client of nearly $500,000.

U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, 93-268-M, $297,000.00 in damages. 

Verdict of $200,000.00 in lost wages, compensatory damages and enhanced compensatory damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs in gender discrimination case (2001).

Affirming trial court's finding of the breach of fiduciary duties by a general partner to a limited partnership. 

Successfully enforced the Town's ordinance and procedures for implementing the ordinance over objection of a racetrack owner. The decision clarified the Town's authority to enact ordinances regardless of motivation and to inspect a permitee's premises.

Established authority of planning board to establish a buildable area separate and apart from the zoning ordinance. 

Assisted a surviving spouse in identifying and managing the proper asset allocation for the funding of a marital and exempt trust.

Maine Supreme Judicial Court, May 26, 2000, Decided. Russell F. Hilliard for Anderson-Watkins Assoc. and St. Angelo. 

This Supreme Court decision upheld the Town’s decision to approve a cell phone tower and explored the interface of the Federal Telecommunications Act and the law of variances. 

This Supreme Court decision upheld the Town’s denial of a special exception for aircraft takeoffs and landings.

Settled many other six-figure matters for clients that are subject to confidentiality agreements.

Due to the imbalance caused by the second insurer and the first insurer having to pay out double what the parties had bargained for, rescission of an insurance policy based on mutual mistake was proper.

Sexual harassment and retaliation, Sullivan County Superior Court. 

Medical negligence, U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. 

Successfully defended a challenge to a planning board decision granting a site plan for the construction of a gas station and Dunkin’ Donuts in town. The New Hampshire Supreme Court held that the board properly considered the application under the administrative finality doctrine, properly granted waivers for the site plan, and the applicant’s storm water management plan complied with the town’s storm water regulations. 

Attorney Hatfield successfully overturned the decision of the trial court and established the validity of postnuptial agreements in New Hampshire.

The Supreme Court upheld the Town’s position that a wedding center was not accessory to an agricultural use. 

Represented a future spouse having substantial separate assets in negotiating a prenuptial agreement which protected her assets while still providing for her spouse in the event of her death.

Represented individuals and couples with assets of several thousands to many millions of dollars in the preparation and implementation of appropriate estate planning documents. 

Represented grandparents in establishing irrevocable trusts for the education of their grandchildren while retaining greater control over the assets than transfers under the Uniform Transfer to Minors Act would provide.

Implemented gifting plans including qualified personal residence trusts, intentionally defective grantor trusts, and grantor retained annuity trusts. 

Avoided a costly lawsuit for a client by convincing the employer its non-compete agreement violated New Hampshire law.

Successfully represented an employer in enforcing an employment agreement against a former employee, resulting in the employee being held to his contractual obligations.

Successfully protected many employees from illegal non-compete agreements by litigating the case to an early resolution, saving her clients’ new jobs and avoiding significant legal fees.

A verdict of $1.415 million for an injured man and $400,000 for his wife, where the man presented to his physician with symptoms of a stroke, and yet the physician and hospital failed to treat him for the stroke, resulting in serious permanent injuries.

Defendants were properly granted summary judgment on plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 claim because plaintiffs did not allege that the procedure for enforcement of settlement agreements under New Hampshire state law was unconstitutional. Allegations of private misuse of state procedures were not enough.

A law center made reasonable accommodations for a law student with diplopia and her dismissal for poor academic performance did not violate the Rehabilitation Act because she was not otherwise qualified for retention at the law center.

In a wrongful discharge suit, employer's motion for judgment n.o.v. was properly granted after a jury entered a verdict for employee. Employee was not discharged because he cooperated with employer's theft investigation by taking a polygraph test; rather, he was fired because he was suspected of theft and the results of the test did not clear him.

Judgment in favor of employee sustained because there was evidence of malicious discharge and issue of connivance was not preserved for review, but employee's wife could not recover on third party beneficiary theory.

Under the Blasko test, a branch church that was a possible beneficiary of charitable trusts had not shown special interest standing to request affirmative relief, in part because the trial court had already taken steps to address the trustees' alleged bad acts and the state Director of Charitable Trusts had been actively involved in the matter.

Administrative decision finding that a school principal was entitled to a new hearing on the non-renewal of her contract was vacated; the Board of Education used an "appearance of bias" standard, rather than the proper actual bias standard.

In a public figure's libel action against a writer and a publisher, a court held that statements that the public figure claimed were libelous were clearly opinions and because the statements were opinions, they were protected by the First Amendment.