Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A.

What is my NH Auto Injury Claim Worth?

2023-04-07T13:36:47Z

A common question asked by clients who are injured in a car crash is, “what is my case worth?” The honest answer, at least at the outset, is “I don’t know yet.” The reason for this is simple. The value of any claim varies based upon the type of injury, the amount of medical care required, the duration of the symptoms, the amount of lost wages and several others factors which can take months or even years to develop. The value of your claim may also be limited by the amount of insurance that the other driver, or you, carried at the time of the auto accident, or by any potential liability issues involved. The potential value of a claim will change over time, and the focus should be on getting the medical care that you need to recover. By doing that, you will not only improve your health, you will also have documentation about your symptoms and care which will be essential to proving your case. For that reason, the best thing that one can do for their case is to get the treatment that the doctor prescribes, and to follow your doctor’s instructions about rest and restrictions as best as you can. A lawyer with knowledge of auto injury claims will be able to guide you through the process of dealing with the insurance companies, health insurance companies, collection agencies, and gathering documents from you medical providers. If necessary, they will also be ready and willing to file suit and take your case to trial. Only those with knowledge of how to properly value a claim, and to hold insurance companies accountable, will be able to achieve the maximum value for you on your claim. Attorney Brenner Webb of Hamblett & Kerrigan, PA has been representing individuals injured in car crashes, motorcycle crashes and trucking accidents for nearly a decade. He is experienced and compassionate, and will offer you the representation you deserve while you focus on your recovery. Call him today.

Negotiation Considerations

2022-11-16T01:54:54Z

Many workers find their jobs involve some level of negotiating agreements either with vendors, customers or others. Prior to entering into such negotiations, it is important for the worker to analyze the negotiation parameters.

The worker must first understand his level of authority in negotiating on behalf of his employer. This may, especially for a new offering, require research on what industry competitors are setting as terms for similar products or services. A meeting with the employer to discuss how the company wants to handle the pricing questions would be sensible.

Once the worker understands the parameters of his authority, he should identify the respective leverage each party has in the negotiation. It is good preparation to consider the alternatives to a negotiated agreement and analyze the possible options available to the other party if an agreement is not reached. This can also determine whether walking away from a potential deal is an acceptable alternative. It is important to remember that all negotiations need not result in an agreement and sometimes the best decision that management can make is to forego a potential deal.

Another important factor to consider is negotiation style. One of the biggest mistakes made in negotiating is to begin with an unreasonable position in the hopes of ultimately settling on a less unreasonable deal. Such tactics often result in the souring of a potential business relationship. It is a good idea to always leave some room for movement in an initial proposal, but not such a good idea to go in with such an unreasonable opening position that you risk tainting the relationship before it even begins.

Finally, it is extremely important to remember that a judge will enforce the written agreement based on its express terms. It would be a mistake to commit to a written provision that is unacceptable to you in reliance on the other party’s statement that it is their form provision and is never enforced. You should proceed with the attitude that, if the other party is unwilling to remove a provision from the agreement, they plan to enforce it. It is important that any agreement, however basic, has clear provisions in plain English so that if a problem arises, a judge can read the written provisions and understand what both sides’ respective rights and obligations are without having to rely on testimony from either party.

Such clarity in the agreement will not only help your company’s position should a dispute arise but it also decreases the chance of a dispute since both parties can look at a written agreement (after their respective memories of the specifics of the deal fail) and review the provisions to which they actually agreed.

J. Daniel Marr is a Director and Shareholder at Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A. His legal practice includes counseling businesses and individuals on a variety of legal issues and advocating on their behalf. Attorney Marr is licensed and practices in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Attorney Marr can be reached at dmarr@nashualaw.com.

Discrimination In The Workplace

2022-11-16T01:55:00Z

To prove employment discrimination it is not enough for the employee to show that the disciplinary action he received was unfair or that the employer was wrong in finding that the employee had a performance problem which resulted in the disciplinary action. The employee must show that the employer took disciplinary action against the employee due to discriminatory animus. This issue was the subject of a United States Court of Appeal First for the Circuit decision of August 23, 2011 in the case of Espinal v. National Grid NE Holdings LLC.

In that case, Juan Espinal appealed an entry of summary judgment of the Massachusetts federal trial court in favor of his former employee, National Grid, in his employment race discrimination claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit hears appeals from both New Hampshire and Massachusetts federal trial courts so therefore its decisions are important for employers and employees alike in both states.

Since December 2001, Espinal has worked as a Customer Meter Service Technician at National Grid and is currently a Senior Technician at the company’s Beverly, Massachusetts location. As such a technician, Espinal is responsible for investigating reported gas leaks while on duty and additionally once out of every four weeks he would be on call. In 2004, Espinal was twice disciplined for failing to respond to pages while on call. The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities requires a National Grid to dispatch a trained employee to a reported gas leak within 60 minutes. National Grid’s employees are disciplined if they fail to respond to a page as to a gas leak when they are required to do. Espinal learned that another white employee had gone unpunished for failing to answer a gas leak page and claimed that showed National Grid discriminated against him in disciplining him with a 5-day suspension because of his Hispanic heritage. The white employee, when the information was brought to the attention of National Grid by Espinal, did receive a 5-day suspension and there was a distinction between the circumstances between Espinal and the white employee. In particular, there was no dispatch supervisor present when the white employee failed to return the page but there was when Espinal failed to answer his page. Because dispatch supervisors are tasked with establishing the employee for the missed page and preserving any relevant documentation, National Grid had to begin its investigation into the past event regarding white employee from scratch by collecting the night’s phone pager and dispatch records and interviewing all employees involved in order to establish good cause for any resulting suspension.

In this case, while Espinal argued that he had not received any of National Grid’s attempted communications on the night of the report of the gas leak, he was unable to prove that the decision-makers at National Grid who provided him with the 5-day suspension believed he had not received the notice but disciplined him anyway because he was Hispanic. To show discrimination under his claims, Espinal would have had to provide sufficient evidence that National Grid’s articulated reason for the disciplinary action was a pretext and that the true reason was discriminatory. The Court found that Espinal could not show sufficient facts to go to a jury on either points and therefore the case was dismissed.

This case is also a reminder to employers that some employees initiate a discrimination case even though the relatively small issue at stake, in this matter a 5-day suspension, appears not to justify a federal court battle. However, some employees may take such actions based upon principal and others may do so because they fear the employer’s discriminatory animus. The employee may believe the employer will try to find a way to fire the employee and the employee by actually bringing the discrimination lawsuit may further believe he will diminish that likelihood. That is because firing him after the discrimination claim was raised and pending could be the evidence that the employer was retaliating against the employee as a result of the discrimination claim that was filed. Thereafter the post-claim firing could put the employer at risk and the employer would be wary.

What Does Funding My Trust Mean?

2022-11-16T01:55:08Z

One of the most common reasons people do a trust is so their assets will avoid having to go through probate after they die. What is probate? Probate is court supervised estate administration; it is the court process that oversees the ultimate distribution of your assets. Probate can be a lengthy, stressful and costly process and most people want to make it as easy as possible on their loved ones after they die. In New Hampshire, it takes a minimum of six (6) months from the date the probate court appoints the Executor, Executrix, or Administrator to complete the process, and more often than not, it takes at least a year to finalize a probated estate. A revocable trust is one of the most common types of trust that can help you reach your goal of making the administration of your assets as easy as possible on your loved ones. A revocable trust acts like a traditional Will in that it states who you want to receive your assets after you die, but the added benefit is that your assets will avoid probate if you properly fund your trust. Funding your trust means you transfer any and all assets you own into your trust. This generally means you transfer the account or asset from your individual name to the name of your trust. Some of the more common types of assets a person would want to actively transfer into their trust are: bank accounts, brokerage accounts, vehicles, and real estate. In New Hampshire, you do this by completing the required documentation at your bank or brokerage firm, transferring the title to your vehicle at your local Town Hall, and doing a new deed for your real estate. If you do this, those assets will not have to go through probate before they are distributed to the beneficiaries named in your trust. Sometimes it also makes sense to name your trust as the beneficiary of your life insurance policies, annuities, or other retirement accounts such as IRAs or a 401(k)s. If you do not properly fund your trust, any assets that are owned in your individual name will go through the probate process before being distributed to your beneficiaries. There are many nuances that go along with a trust and many pitfalls for those who are inexperienced in estate planning so be sure to consult an estate planning attorney to make sure your goals are properly planned and executed. Andrea Van Iten is an attorney at Hamblett & Kerrigan who focuses her practice in the area of estate planning, including wills, trusts, health and financial powers of attorney, trust and estate administration, as well as small business matters. Attorney Van Iten can be reached at avaniten@hamker.com.

Crowdfunding (Part III)

2022-11-16T01:55:16Z

While the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (the “Act”) has recently been signed into law, collecting small sums of money from the general public over the Internet is not a new phenomenon. Crowdfunding or crowdsourcing has been around for a few years. In the past, the majority of the Crowdfunding sites catered to one time creative events such as a concert series, or were used by charities to raise money.

The Act

Previously, the sale of an equity interest was registerable under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“1933 Act”), unless the security or the transaction was exempt.

The Act provides for a funding exemption from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) registration requirements for certain offerings with the following limitations.

(A) the aggregate amount sold within the previous 12-month period in reliance upon this exemption is: (i) $1,000,000, as such amount is adjusted by the SEC to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or less; or (ii) if the issuer provides potential investors with audited financial statements, $2,000,000, as such amount is adjusted by the SEC to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or less.

(B) the aggregate amount sold to any investor in reliance on this exemption within the previous 12-month period does not exceed the lesser of: (i) $10,000, as such amount is adjusted by the SEC to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics; and (ii) 10% of such investor’s annual income.

When Congress passed the Act, lawmakers left it up to the SEC to determine the mechanics of how such transactions will actually work. The SEC started taking public comments in May.

In that the SEC has 270 days to implement the regulation; your company will not be able to use the Crowdfunding exemption until early 2013. Until then, federal and state securities law prohibitions remain in place against publicly accessible Internet securities offerings.

State Law

New Hampshire based companies or companies looking to raise money in the state must continue to comply with the current state securities law requirements. The Act only exempts equity offerings from federal securities law registration requirements. Also, the requirements of federal and state securities laws regarding disclosures, including disclosures of all material facts and risks to investors, will remain in place.

Issues to Consider

1. Prior Raises

If your company has raised more than a $1 million in the last 12 months, then your company will not qualify for the crowdfunding exemption.

2. Disclosure Requirements

The Act does not relieve your company from disclosure requirements. The requirement to disclose all material facts and risk factors to investors will remain in place. Failure to do so may expose your company to liability for securities fraud, private lawsuits and administrative enforcement actions.

3. Brokers/Dealers

Be aware of anyone or any company offering to collect a fee in exchange for help in raising capital over the Internet. Because the Act has not been implemented, such offers could be a scam, preying upon those entrepreneurs less familiar with the Act’s requirements

4. Communication Plan

Communicating with hundreds of “owners” may distract management from devoting the time and energy that is necessary to run a successful business. Your company will need an effective communication plan.

5. Keeping Your Secrets

Some companies don’t want to share a business plan or idea without requiring a non-disclosure agreement. However, your company will need to give potential investors enough information to make an informed decision and to allow the potential investor to preform their due diligence: company name, address, information about the management team, a business plan and description of the business, and the intended use of the funds raised must still be disclosed.

6. Financial Disclosure

If you don’t want your competitors to see how your company is doing, then you may not want your financials made public. But if you Crowdfund, you may need to provide different amounts of financial information to your investors depending on the amount you are attempting to raise.

7. You Still Need Professional Advice

The investments you receive through Crowdfunding will be for equity in your company, so you will need to have a lawyer structure the deal and set up the necessary funding documents. It would be ideal to have a Private Placement Memo that would disclose all of the risks to potential investors.

8. Up-Front Costs

There are a lot of costs that you will incur before placing your opportunity online for potential investors. If you are only raising a small amount, the Crowdfunding may not be a cost effective option.

Paul D. Creme is an attorney with Hamblett & Kerrigan PA. His practice is focused on business and corporate law. Of particular interest are the areas of software and emerging technologies. You can reach Attorney Creme at pcreme@nashualaw.com.

Avoidable Firings

2022-11-16T01:55:21Z

In my experience in representing employers for several decades, these are some insights as to how to avoid being fired. First try to avoid sharing your personal feelings to co-workers. While all of us at times may be going through difficulties, whether it being a loss of a family member, divorce, physical injury, or other stressors, if you are consistently thought of as a black hole of despair your co-workers will not want to work with you. Your career path will suffer if your fellow team members do not want to be on your team. If there is a restructuring of the company and you are the person people generally do not want to work with because you always complain about a stressor in your life, you may be the first one to be laid off. Likewise, sharing your romantic feelings about a co-worker is very dangerous. The Rom Com series The Office was a very fun series, yet Jim and Pam in real life often do not get together and if they do they may later break up which can seriously impact their working relationship. I have also seen circumstances where if a relationship ends badly and there are accusations, whether real or false, about domestic violence, such allegations could cause someone to lose his or her job. Also if you attempt to have a relationship with a co-worker outside of work at a social gathering which is rebuffed by your co-worker that can impact your career path. In particular, if you get drunk and grab a co-worker or make sexist comments to that co-worker, whether at a bar or private social gathering, your employer can decide to fire you even though all your activities or comments were done outside the workplace. Alcohol and drug use can obviously hurt your career path. While being an alcoholic and getting treatment is afforded protections under state and federal employment disability law, showing up to work impaired generally need not be tolerated by your employer, absent it being unintended such as for example following a pharmacist or doctor recommended dose of a drug prescribed to you, for the first time that adversely effects your job performance. Sharing your opinions unrelated to work can also result in your job loss. While employees working in the public sector, being the government, have a little bit more protection, generally most of us work in the private work force. The constitutional freedom of speech right generally prohibits government from prohibiting your free speech, not your private employer. There are laws that protect employees from complaining to each other about work-related issues and sharing their compensation with each other. While such company related speech is legally protected it may still not be prudent if you are looking to expand the possibilities of your career path. However, you have no such legal protection in the private workplace as to political speech. For example, if you feel very strongly about the current or past United States President and you get into a heated discussion with a co-worker that has a different opinion, you, the co-worker, or the both of you might be suspended or fired by your employer if it disrupts the workforce and at a minimum your boss may consider you to have a quick temper and therefore pass over you for a promotion. Daniel Marr is a Director and Shareholder at Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A. His legal practice includes counseling businesses and individuals on a variety of legal issues and advocating on their behalf. Attorney Marr is licensed and practices in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Attorney Marr can be reached at dmarr@nashualaw.com.

A Disabled Employee Does Not Decide What is Essential for the Job

2022-11-16T01:55:27Z

The New Hampshire Supreme Court on December 23, 2021 in the case of Patricia Crowe v. Appalachian Stitching Company, LLC, reaffirmed for both employers and employees alike that under New Hampshire and federal law, the disabled employee’s explanation of what he/she needs to do in order to perform the job does not establish what are the actual essential functions of the job. In this particular case, Ms. Crowe claimed her employer violated the American With Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and New Hampshire employment discrimination law, RSA 354-A, by refusing to accommodate her sciatica. The employer filed for summary judgment stating there were not triable fact issues and that the employer should win without a trial, which was granted, and the New Hampshire Supreme Court agreed with the trial court that Ms. Crowe did not set forth sufficient facts for the case to go to trial. The courts in reviewing the New Hampshire disability discrimination law of RSA 354-A look for guidance from the cases analyzing the ADA. Ms. Crowe had a non-work related back pain in which she went to the emergency room and thereafter sought medical treatment. Since her back pain was not work related, she was not afforded any protection under the Worker’s Compensation Law. Further, her employer had less than 50 employees so there was no question of whether she was afforded an unpaid leave of absence due to her medical condition under the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). Therefore, Ms. Crowe relied on disability discrimination laws that require an employer to reasonably accommodate a disability so that an employee can perform the essential functions of the job. For example, if an employee is in a wheelchair and the workstation table is based upon a person standing at it, a reasonable accommodation may be to lower the workstation table so that the employee can perform his/her tasks while at the workstation in the wheelchair. In this case, Appalachian hired her as an assembler which had a job description that stated the employee must have the ability to bend, lift, and turn freely. Ms. Crowe stated she did not believe she needed to bend, lift, and turn freely in order to perform her job. The Court noted that in determining whether or not a job function is essential it looks to whether an employer actually requires all employees in this particular position to perform the alleged essential function. The personal, specific experience of the disabled employee alone is of no consequence in the essential job function inquiry. Instead the disabled employee must produce competent evidence, other than self-serving testimony, that shows what are the essential job functions. In this case, the employer presented the job description as well as testimony from its general manager and floor supervisor to support the contentions that the ability to bend, lift, and turn freely were essential job functions. Ms. Crowe presented no evidence other than her own testimony that she did not need to bend, lift, or stoop on the job. Therefore, the New Hampshire Supreme Court opined that the trial court correctly concluded that Ms. Crowe did not create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the functions of an assembler at the company. The Court noted that a request for a medical leave of absence can, in some circumstances, require an employer to granted a leave as a reasonable accommodation under the ADA, however, Ms. Crowe’s doctor’s inquiry about the available of FMLA was not such a request. In other words, had Ms. Crowe requested a few additional days off to have her back get better, if that was feasible given her sciatica, the Court may have determined such a limited medical leave was a reasonable accommodation under the ADA even though she was not otherwise covered under the FMLA. If such a request had been made a further inquiry would have likely been made as to whether or not Ms. Crowe, with her sciatica, would after a chance to rest at home be able to come back to work and bend, lift, and turn freely at the job. J. Daniel Marr is a Director and Shareholder at Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A. His legal practice includes counseling businesses and individuals on a variety of legal issues and advocating on their behalf. Attorney Marr is licensed and practices in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Attorney Marr can be reached at dmarr@hamker.com.

Work Disability Laws Require Worker to Provide Parameters of Disability When Requesting An Accommodation

2022-11-16T01:55:32Z

On January 31, 2022, the New Hampshire Federal Court in the case of Leah Wallace v. NH Ball Bearings, Inc. granted summary judgment to the employer New Hampshire Ball Bearings, Inc. against the against the employee Leah Wallace so that she was unable to go to trial on her claims under the American With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the New Hampshire law against discrimination, and wrongful termination. Wallace applied for a position at New Hampshire Ball and was offered a position as a Teflon assembler on the first shift entry level at $14.60/hr. During her interview, Wallace noted she had a latex allergy and the employer responded that it could accommodate by allowing her to use non-latex gloves and to carry her EpiPen on the factory floor. Ms. Wallace later explained her concern of being in close proximity to other workers who wears latex gloves. The employer requested more information in relation to the effect of her disability in that it previously thought that it was a latex contact issue rather than also being sensitive to airborne allergens from latex. Ultimately, the Court in a 35-page decision granted summary judgment for the employer. It found that Wallace’s failure to provide sufficient detail of the parameters of her disability, especially when the employer already indicated its willingness to make some reasonable accommodations, precluded her from going to trial. By way of example, the Court noted that it was unknown whether or not Wallace could work in close proximity to co-worker’s sneakers that had latex. The Court made it clear that it understood that latex allergies can certainly be a disability and that Wallace had a disability related to latex. It was her inability to provide the employer sufficient information for it to make an informed decision as to the scope of her disability that resulted in a ruling that she would not get to a trial on her claims. Simply put, an employee has an obligation to inform its employer of the parameters of a claimed disability so that the employer and employee could then through an interactive process see if reasonable accommodations could be made to allow the employee to perform the essential functions of the job. The Court did not get to that analysis in that Wallace did not provide sufficient information for the employer to engage in the interactive process with Wallace to determine whether or not a reasonable accommodation could be made to permit her to perform the essential functions of her job. J. Daniel Marr is a Director and Shareholder at Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A. His legal practice includes counseling businesses and individuals on a variety of legal issues and advocating on their behalf. Attorney Marr is licensed and practices in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Attorney Marr can be reached at dmarr@nashualaw.com.

Selling Real Estate from a Trust or Estate?

2022-11-16T01:55:37Z

Often, when a person dies and owned real estate, that real estate needs to be sold; sometimes it is sold to pay debts of the estate but most often it is sold because the heirs do not want to deal with the real estate and prefer money instead. If you are going to be responsible for dealing with the real estate, first you want to make sure the insurance stays covering the property either when: it is unoccupied; relatives are living in it; or there is a renter in the property, while decisions are being made whether to sell or transfer the property to heirs or beneficiaries. Homeowner’s insurance based upon an owner occupied property is at a different premium than an unoccupied or rented property and you do not want there to be a lapse in insurance coverage because you did not inform the insurance company of the change in status of the use of the property. Selling real estate that is held by a revocable trust after the grantor has died, or selling real estate from an estate that is in probate, are not all that different than selling real estate from an individual person, but there are a few key differences and traps to look out for. If real estate is being sold from a revocable trust after the grantor has died, the successor trustee is responsible for signing all of the required closing documents, including the broker listing agreement, a purchase and sale agreement and ultimately a Fiduciary Deed, and not a Warranty Deed. When selling real estate from an estate that is in probate, the executor or administrator of the estate is responsible for those tasks and you must first get appointed as executor or administrator before signing these documents. Make sure you sign all of these documents in your representative capacity such as John Smith, Executor of the Estate of Jane Smith or John Smith, Trustee of the Jane Smith Revocable Trust. It is also always imperative to review any additional stipulations put into a purchase and sale agreement to make sure you can abide by them and they are in the best interest of the trust or estate. For example, if the sale of the property is subject to court approval, that should be spelled out in the additional provisions section of the standard purchase and sale agreement. As always, it is prudent to get an attorney involved to review your purchase and sale agreement to make sure it protects your interests. Andrea Van Iten is an attorney at Hamblett & Kerrigan who focuses her practice in the area of estate planning, including wills, trusts, health and financial powers of attorney as well as trust and estate administration. Attorney Van Iten can be reached at avaniten@hamker.com.

Act Poorly; Get Fired

2022-11-16T01:55:43Z

On October 7, 2021, the New Hampshire federal court in the case of James Saunders, et al v. Shaw’s Supermarkets, Inc. issued an Order dismissing Saunders’ whole host of claims due to his frustration he was fired from his job at Shaw’s after coming into the store while on vacation and berating one of his co-workers on duty who was closing a department for the first time. Saunders also entered that department without hairnet or face mask and swore at his co-worker several times. Saunders asserted that he was in the protected classes of race, disability, and age. Shaw’s was able to show it performed a thorough investigation and also offered to Saunders the opportunity to take advantage of the employee assistance program which he ignored. Saunders sought somewhere between $1,300,000 – $1,600,000 in damages. He had 13 claims against Shaw’s for racial, age, gender, and disability discrimination, slander, defamation, financial harassment, harassment, wrongful termination, violation of labor laws, free speech, freedom of assembly, and personal happiness. His girlfriend, who was a co-worker that was not fired, also joined in the suit. The federal court fully analyzed both sides’ evidence and the various claims by Saunders and his girlfriend who were self-represented. The judge found that Saunders failed to make any allegations that the reason he was fired was for any reason other than his misconduct when he went into the store while on vacation and berated his co-worker. New Hampshire and federal discrimination laws prohibit an employer taking adverse employment action including firing, at least in part, due to discriminatory animus or there being a disparate impact on certain people of a protected class. In this case, Saunders was a jerk and being a jerk is not a protected class. The court’s decision, while totally consistent with prior legal precedent, is a good reminder is that employees do not get any additional protection for being a jerk due to them being a member of a protected class. While some accommodations could be made for someone who has a mental health disability, tolerating a worker berating and swearing at a co-worker, as well as violating safety measures such as a grocery store employee entering into a department without a hairnet or facemask contrary to Shaw’s food, safety, sanitation, and Covid-19 policies, needs not be tolerated by an employer. It is also a good signal for employees who think they can disregard an employer’s mask requirement due to the pandemic that such insubordination can result in being fired. J. Daniel Marr is a Director and Shareholder at Hamblett & Kerrigan, P.A. His legal practice includes counseling businesses and individuals on a variety of legal issues and advocating on their behalf. Attorney Marr is licensed and practices in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Attorney Marr can be reached at dmarr@nashualaw.com.