Case Law Cited in the [Lying Lawyer]’ s Memorandum
Robert Tanguay v. Hidey Games et al., N.H. Supreme Court | Memorandum of [Lying Lawyer], Esq. filed Aug. 20, 2026
I’m suing a lawyer I assert that has lied in court. This is the case law supplied by her attorney that she hired in supreme court.
Note on Barr v. Mara: the [Lying Lawyer] memorandum cites an unpublished District of New Hampshire LEXIS decision. A stable free direct copy was not readily indexed in the public sources searched, so the entry provides a Google Scholar locator in addition to the exact LEXIS citation.
1. Ortolano v. City of Nashua
Citation: 177 N.H. 359, 361 (2025) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] pp. 2-3
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Motion-to-dismiss standard: assume pleaded facts, draw reasonable inferences for plaintiff, but not legal conclusions; test pleaded facts against governing law.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
2. Toy v. City of Rochester
Citation: 172 N.H. 443, 448 (2019) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] pp. 2-3
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: New Hampshire notice pleading; complaint must state the general character of the action and give fair notice of the theory and relief sought.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
3. In the Matter of St. Pierre & Thatcher
Citation: 172 N.H. 209, 217 (2019) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 3
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Self-represented parties remain bound by procedural rules and substantive law.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
4. Thomas v. Telegraph Publishing Co.
Citation: 155 N.H. 314, 321 (2007) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 5
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Elements of defamation: negligent publication of a false and defamatory factual statement about plaintiff to a third party, absent privilege.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
5. McGranahan v. Dahar
Citation: 119 N.H. 758, 763, 768-70 (1979) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] pp. 5-6
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Absolute litigation privilege for pertinent statements in judicial proceedings; privilege also discussed for communications to police/prosecutors concerning suspected criminal activity.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
6. McCarthy v. Manchester Police Department
Citation: 168 N.H. 202, 210 & n.5 (2015) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 6
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: [Lying Lawyer] cites it for the proposition that New Hampshire recognizes a single common-law defamation claim rather than a separate tort of ‘constitutional defamation.’
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
7. HippoPress, LLC v. SMG
Citation: 150 N.H. 304, 308 (2003) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 6
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: State action is required for a claimed violation of the New Hampshire Constitution in the context discussed there.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
8. Polk County v. Dodson
Citation: 454 U.S. 312, 325 (1981) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 6
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: A public defender does not act under color of state law when performing the traditional functions of counsel to a criminal defendant.
Full opinion: U.S. Supreme Court full opinion
9. Barr v. Mara
Citation: 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70369, at *2 (D.N.H. May 17, 2013) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 6
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: [Lying Lawyer] cites this unpublished D.N.H. disposition for the proposition that an appointed public defender is not a state actor for a constitutional-rights damages claim.
Full opinion: Google Scholar locator (unpublished D.N.H. decision; public direct copy was not readily indexed)
10. Thorpe v. State, Department of Corrections
Citation: 133 N.H. 299, 303-04 (1990) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 7
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Negligent infliction of emotional distress requires proof of physical manifestations and, in the circumstances of Thorpe, expert proof of causation.
Full opinion: vLex full opinion
11. Conant v. O’Meara
Citation: 167 N.H. 644, 649-52 (2015) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 7
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Fraud on the court is a narrow equitable doctrine directed to extraordinary corruption of the judicial process; [Lying Lawyer] relies on its strong-proof discussion.
Full opinion: Justia full opinion
12. Ojo v. Lorenzo
Citation: 164 N.H. 717, 727 (2013) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 8
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Elements of malicious prosecution: proceeding instituted by defendant, lack of probable cause, malice, and favorable termination.
Full opinion: Counsel Stack full opinion
13. Tessier v. Rockefeller
Citation: 162 N.H. 324, 335, 337 (2011) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] pp. 8-9
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Abuse of process and tortious-interference principles, including improper use of process and elements of interference with an economic relationship.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
14. Singer Asset Finance Co., LLC v. Wyner
Citation: 156 N.H. 468, 478 (2007) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 9
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Elements/limitations concerning intentional interference with contractual or advantageous economic relations.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
15. Jay Edwards, Inc. v. Baker
Citation: 130 N.H. 41, 47 (1987) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 9
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Civil conspiracy: combination of two or more persons acting in concert for an unlawful purpose, or lawful purpose by unlawful means; supporting facts are required.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
16. ERG, Inc. v. Barnes
Citation: 137 N.H. 186, 189 (1993) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 10
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: [Lying Lawyer] relies on ERG for the proposition that a plaintiff who has already had meaningful opportunities to plead a viable claim is not entitled to unlimited further attempts.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
17. State v. Blackmer
Citation: 149 N.H. 47, 48-49 (2003) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 10
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: Preservation and adequate appellate briefing; undeveloped or unpreserved arguments may not be reviewed.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
18. Vogel v. Vogel
Citation: 137 N.H. 321, 322 (1993) Cited at: [Lying Lawyer] p. 10
How [Lying Lawyer] uses it: [Lying Lawyer] cites Vogel for declining further discussion of arguments that do not warrant appellate treatment.
Full opinion: CourtListener full opinion
Research caution: The descriptions above summarize how the [Lying Lawyer] memorandum uses the cited authorities; they are not substitutes for reading the full opinions, including limiting facts, procedural posture, and later treatment.
