New Hampshire
How Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure.
New Hampshire courts tend to follow the principles established by Amgen, particularly in relation to class certification and the adequacy of evidence required to establish the necessity of a class action. New Hampshire mirrors federal law in emphasizing the importance of the predominance of common questions of law or fact.
New Hampshire Rule of Civil Procedure 23 establishes the framework for class actions, equivalent to Federal Rule 23, emphasizing that the court must evaluate whether common questions of law or fact predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.
New Hampshire courts emphasized the predominance of common issues in affirming class certification for a consumer fraud claim.
The court held that individual damages questions do not preclude class certification when common issues predominate.
The court confirmed that issues of justiciability and class action appropriateness are analyzed similarly under state rules as in the federal framework.
New Hampshire's approach to class actions, as derived from Amgen, aligns closely with the federal standards, particularly concerning the necessity of demonstrating predominance and adequacy of representation. Both jurisdictions require rigorous analysis before certifying a class action but may differ in procedural nuances.
Understanding the principles of class certification and the criteria set forth in Amgen is vital for the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in civil procedure sections.