The state where damages caps keep losing
New Hampshire has no cap on damages in birth injury cases. The legislature tried twice, and the state’s Supreme Court struck the caps down both times. In Carson v. Maurer (1980), the court invalidated a $250,000 limit on non-economic damages under the state constitution’s equal protection guarantee; when lawmakers returned with an $875,000 cap, Brannigan v. Usitalo (1991) struck that one too. The principle the court kept repeating is simple: the most catastrophically injured plaintiffs cannot be singled out to subsidize everyone else’s insurance premiums.
For a family whose child suffered hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy or cerebral palsy, that means recovery is measured by the evidence alone: the lifetime cost of medical and attendant care, therapy, and equipment proven through an expert life-care plan, lost earning capacity, and the non-economic losses a jury finds, with no statutory ceiling above any of it.
New Hampshire’s deadlines
New Hampshire uses its general personal injury statute for medical claims: three years from the act, or from discovery where the injury and its causal link could not reasonably have been found sooner (RSA 508:4). For children, RSA 508:8 tolls the clock during minority: an injured child may bring their own claim within two years after turning eighteen, one of the more protective rules in the country.
The generous child’s window hides the usual trap: the parents’ own claims (the medical bills they have paid, their consortium losses) run on the adult three-year clock, and the evidence a case is built from (fetal monitoring strips, staffing records, witness memory) erodes long before any deadline. For a state-by-state comparison of children’s deadlines, see our statute of limitations guide.
No certificate of merit, but real proof requirements
New Hampshire does not make plaintiffs file a certificate of merit with the complaint. State law has provided for pretrial screening panels in medical injury actions (RSA 519-B), though in practice panels are frequently waived or bypassed by agreement of the parties. What never gets waived is the substantive burden: RSA 507-E requires the family to prove, through qualified expert testimony, the standard of care, the departure from it, and causation. A New Hampshire birth injury case is won or lost on obstetrical and neonatal expert review of the records, which is why that review happens before anyone files anything.
No caps and a tolled clock for the child do not make a case — the records do. A free, no-obligation review of the delivery records can tell you whether the standard of care was met and which deadlines apply to your family.
How birth injury claims work in New Hampshire
A claim must show that care during pregnancy, labor, or delivery fell below the accepted standard and caused the child’s injury. Careful, appropriate care sometimes still ends in injury, and when that is what the records show, there is no claim to bring. The recurring patterns are the same ones seen nationally: fetal distress on the monitor without a timely response, a delayed cesarean, mismanaged shoulder dystocia in the delivery room, untreated newborn jaundice.
New Hampshire’s obstetric landscape is small and concentrated: Dartmouth Health’s Children’s Hospital at Dartmouth-Hitchcock in Lebanon operates the state’s advanced NICU, with Elliot Hospital in Manchester and Catholic Medical Center handling much of the southern tier’s delivery volume. Many high-risk pregnancies near the border deliver in Boston. When care crosses state lines, which state’s law governs can itself become a live question, and it is one reason early legal review matters in a small state.
Who handles New Hampshire birth injury cases
Birth Injury Advocate is an alliance between two named law firms: Banville Law (New York and Washington, D.C.) and The Weitz Firm, LLC (Pennsylvania and New Jersey). Neither firm’s attorneys are licensed in New Hampshire. When you contact us about a New Hampshire delivery, we connect your family with the alliance’s vetted network of local birth injury attorneys: New Hampshire-licensed lawyers who try medical negligence cases in the state’s courts and know its screening-panel practice. The referral and the consultation both cost nothing, and any attorney fee is paid out of the recovery.
Frequently asked questions
How long do I have to file a birth injury lawsuit in New Hampshire?
New Hampshire’s general three-year personal injury statute applies (RSA 508:4), with a built-in discovery rule for injuries that could not reasonably have been found sooner. A child’s own claim is tolled during minority: under RSA 508:8, a minor may bring the action within two years after turning eighteen. Parents’ claims run on the adult clock.
Does New Hampshire cap damages in birth injury cases?
No. The New Hampshire Supreme Court has twice struck down damages caps as unconstitutional: a $250,000 cap in Carson v. Maurer (1980) and an $875,000 cap in Brannigan v. Usitalo (1991). Compensation is limited only by the proof: lifetime care costs, lost earning capacity, and the non-economic losses a jury finds.
Does New Hampshire require a certificate of merit or review panel?
New Hampshire has no certificate-of-merit filing requirement. State law has provided for pretrial screening panels in medical injury cases (RSA 519-B), but in current practice panels are frequently waived or bypassed by agreement; a New Hampshire attorney can advise whether one will figure in a specific case.
Is every birth injury in New Hampshire malpractice?
No. Some birth injuries occur despite careful, appropriate care. New Hampshire law (RSA 507-E) requires proof, through expert testimony, that care fell below the accepted standard and that the failure caused the child’s injury.
Sources
- RSA 508:4 – three-year limitation; discovery rule.
- RSA 508:8 – tolling during minority; two years after majority.
- RSA 507-E – actions for medical injury; expert proof requirements.
- RSA 519-B – pretrial screening panels in medical injury actions.
- Carson v. Maurer, 120 N.H. 925 (1980) – striking the $250,000 non-economic cap.
- Brannigan v. Usitalo, 134 N.H. 50 (1991) – striking the $875,000 non-economic cap.
This page is for general education and is not legal advice; statutes and cases are cited by number so you can verify them, and deadlines depend on facts specific to your case. Legal statements reflect the reviewing attorneys’ professional experience. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.