New Hampshire
How Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Sovereign Immunity (FSIA).
New Hampshire adheres to a principle of sovereign immunity that limits the liability of the state and its agencies. This aligns with the federal Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), though New Hampshire places additional emphasis on its own state constitutional provisions regarding immunity.
New Hampshire grants sovereign immunity to the state and its agencies, preventing them from being sued without consent, with exceptions for specific waivers defined by statute.
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire reaffirmed the doctrine of sovereign immunity, ruling that the state could not be sued for tort claims stemming from negligent actions of its employees.
The court held that the state retains sovereign immunity in tort claims unless the statute explicitly permits such suits.
In this case, the court ruled that sovereign immunity applies to state agencies performing governmental functions.
New Hampshire's sovereign immunity follows principles similar to the FSIA in terms of limiting liability; however, state law has unique statutes and constitutional provisions that further define and sometimes restrict where suits can be brought against the state. Unlike the FSIA, which provides explicit exceptions for commercial activity, New Hampshire's waiver of immunity depends on specific state statutes.
Understanding sovereign immunity is crucial for the New Hampshire bar exam, as it frequently features scenarios involving state liability and the exceptions to immunity that may arise under state law.