Morrison Mahoney Partner Joe Flanagan and Associate Grace Ferranto recently succeeded on motions to dismiss four abuse lawsuits against an adolescent group home in New Hampshire. These cases were part of 1,300+ cases against the State of New Hampshire and its contractors for alleged abuse/excessive restraint at Youth Detention Centers.
Most of the alleged incidents occurred more than a decade ago, and thus they argued that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations. By law, plaintiffs had the burden to show that the “discovery rule” tolled the statute of limitations by showing that they were not aware that they were injured at the time of the alleged abuse, and/or were not aware of the causal connection between their injuries and the facilities’ conduct (as opposed to the conduct of rogue employees who allegedly harmed the plaintiffs). Joe and Grace argued that the plaintiffs necessarily knew of both their injuries and of the causal connection between their injury and the facilities’ conduct, at the time the incidents occurred. Therefore, they argued the discovery rule would not toll the statute of limitations, and their claims should be barred.
Plaintiffs relied on the Supreme Court of New Hampshire’s decision in Troy v. Bishop Guertin High School., 176 N.H. 131 (2023), in arguing that a plaintiff’s knowledge of a causal connection between her injury and the negligent hiring of the abuser’s employer cannot be assumed based solely on the employment relationship. Joe and Grace successfully argued that the court in Troy simply declined to establish a per-se rule regarding a plaintiff’s knowledge of a causal connection, which should be a fact-based inquiry in every case. They argued, and the court agreed, that the same facts that established that the plaintiff knew they were injured at the time of the alleged abuse also established that the plaintiff was aware of a causal link between the facility’s negligent hiring and the employee’s abuse of the plaintiff.
