 |
 |
|||
 |
 |
|||
 |
 |
|||
 |
||||
 |
||||
 |
||||
 |
||||
 |
||||
 |
||||
Cronin & Bisson, P.C., is a Manchester, New
Hampshire-based law firm that seeks to help our clients attain their business
and personal goals.
Cronin & Bisson serves the needs of corporate, association and individual clients. The firm is engaged in the general practice of law and provides legal services in civil litigation, real estate acquisitions, tax abatements, development and management of commercial real estate, eminent domain, employment, personal injury, probate, insurance law, construction law, community association law, bankruptcy, land use planning and zoning, and corporate law.
A Sampling of Our Cases
"A
Million Dollar Promisary Note"
"The First Amendment and Signs in Nashua"
"Taxing the Hole in the Ground"
"A Condominium Conversion Success"
"The Tax Bill Isn’t Always Final"
"A Choice Between Conservation and Development"
"A Life-Altering Accident for an 8-Year-Old Boy"
›
A Million Dollar Promissory Note
Our clients were the holders of a $1 million promissory note which was
in default. The principal balance then due exceeded $500,000. The maker
of the note seized on one sentence of the note added at the last minute
to assert that the note was not in default and no sum was due. After a
week-long trial, the jury agreed with our clients and entered judgment
for the entire outstanding principal balance. The maker appealed the decision
to the Supreme Court which eventually affirmed our jury verdict.
However, that did not end the matter. While the case was pending in the trial court, the maker, a New Hampshire corporation, sold all of its assets. Thus, after the decision was affirmed, the maker was judgment proof with no ability to pay.
We proceeded in two separate actions against the purchaser of the assets and the principals of the judgment proof New Hampshire corporation. After significant effort on our part, the parties agreed to settle the matter on confidential terms.
›
A Crash on Route 28
Our client came to us after recovering from surgery to repair his knee.
His knee had been smashed in a car accident at a busy intersection.
Unfortunately, the doctors were unable to save our client’s knee cap. As a result, our client was no longer able to work as a carpet installer as he had before the accident. We filed suit against the driver of the other vehicle. During the jury trial in the Hillsborough County Superior Court, we settled the case.
›
The First Amendment and Signs in Nashua
We represented the owner of a billboard company who hoped to construct
a billboard in Nashua, New Hampshire. However, the City of Nashua had
recently enacted a new sign ordinance which essentially prohibited the
construction of any new billboard. We challenged the sign ordinance asserting
that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects commercial
speech. Therefore, the City’s complete ban on all billboards was
unconstitutional. The trial court agreed declaring the complete ban unenforceable.
›
Taxing the Hole in the Ground
We represented the owner of a gravel pit in southern New Hampshire. In
1998, the New Hampshire legislature adopted the Excavation Activity Tax
which was a real estate tax imposed on the pit area. We viewed it as a
real estate tax on a hole in the ground. The resulting tax imposed on
our client was far greater than the real estate taxes assessed the year
before and unrelated to the fair market value of the parcel of property.
Our client decided to challenge the constitutionality of the new tax.
The trial court ruled against us and determined that there were no constitutional problems with taxing the hole in the ground. We appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, raising a number of constitutional challenges. The Supreme Court agreed declaring the excavation activity tax “unconstitutional on its face.”
›
A Condominium Conversion Success
Seeing a need in the community for condominiums, our clients purchased
a seventy-six unit apartment building and sought our help with changing
the form of ownership from multi-unit rentals to condominiums. The conversion
process requires a comprehensive application for submission to the New
Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. This process took approximately
eight months before the condominium was registered and declared. Our clients
upgraded the property and within a year after declaring the condominium,
all units were sold. Our clients saw the investment opportunity of an
older apartment building, not rented to capacity, by transforming it into
a thriving condominium community in one of the State’s largest cities.
›
The Tax Bill Isn’t Always Final
Our client’s real estate tax bill for its office property had risen
five hundred percent from the previous year. The city had increased the
assessed value of the property from $650,000 to $3,100,000. Although our
client had completed major renovations during the year, the huge tax increase
prompted our client to ask us to review whether a tax abatement was warranted.
Despite the superior improvements added to the property, the client could
not find interested tenants. We challenged the assessment in the State
Board of Tax and Land Appeals asserting that the city’s assessed
value was based on an unrealistic opinion of the fair market value of
the property. The State Board agreed and ordered the city to reduce the
assessed value by nearly $1.9 million resulting in a $40,000 real estate
tax savings each year.
›
A Choice Between Conservation and Development
Our clients owned a very large and valuable piece of real estate in southern
New Hampshire. The property had been used for decades in the family farming
business. Developers were knocking at our clients’ door. Our clients
hoped to preserve the open space of the property and realize some of the
development value of the property to secure the future of the family business.
We assisted our clients in negotiations with the Trust for Public Lands
to convert the development rights on the property to cash in exchange
for a conservation easement, helping our clients achieve their goal of
protecting the property from future development and securing the future
of the family business.
›
Changing Uses
New Hampshire encourages the preservation of open spaces by allowing owners
of property of ten acres or more to submit the property to “current
use.” Current use taxes are significantly less than taxes assessed
based on the fair market value of the property. The trade off is that
when the property is removed from current use, the municipality is entitled
to assess a “land use change tax” equal to 10% of the value
of the property at the time of the change of use.
We represented a client that purchased an approved subdivision of thirteen residential lots. Although the subdivision had been approved, the property remained in current use. Our client began altering the property by clearing the lots and installing the road in the spring. Despite the physical changes to the property, the town waited until all of the subdivision improvements were complete and the individual lots were ready for sale to assess the land use change tax. We challenged this approach asserting that the town should have assessed the change tax long before the road work was complete. In our view, the individual lots were worth significantly less because they were not ready for resale as building lots when the change occurred. The State Board of Tax and Land Appeals agreed concluding that the statute required the town to assess the change tax at the time of the change and not some arbitrary date picked by the assessor. As a result, the State Board ordered a tax refund in excess of $70,000.
›
Missing Association Funds
We represented a homeowner’s association in the New Hampshire mountains.
Our client had been managed by a property management company which was
created by the same individuals who had formed the association years earlier.
When new members were elected to the board of our client, they discovered
what appeared to be accounting irregularities. We were asked to investigate
and confirmed what our clients feared. By then the management company
had failed, leaving no assets behind to address our client’s problem.
We filed suit against the individuals involved, the insurance agency charged
with obtaining a fidelity bond, and the insurance carrier. As the matter
proceeded toward trial, both the insurance agency and the insurance carrier
agreed to settle the matter.
›
A Life-Altering Accident for an 8-Year-Old Boy
Our young client was playing with a tape recorder designed for young children.
When he attempted to place the headphones on his head, the headphones
snapped and sharp metal punctured his eye. As a result, he lost his vision
in the punctured eye. We filed suit against the overseas manufacturer
of the toy. After obtaining a number of expert witnesses to testify about
the problems with the design and materials used, the manufacturer agreed
to settle the case.
Reported Cases and Decisions
Appeal of Brady, 145 N.H. 308 (2000)
Bielagus v. EMRE of N.H., Inc., 149 N.H. 635 (2003)
Bolduc v. Beal Bank, SSB, 994 F.Supp. 82 (D.N.H. 1998)
Indigo America, Inc. v. Londonderry Technologies, LLC, 56 Fed.R.Serv.
3d 798 (D.N.H. 2003)
Nash Family Properties v. Town of Hudson, 147 N.H. 233
(2002)
National Marine Underwriters v. McCormack, 138 N.H. 6
(1994)
Norwood Group, Inc. v. Phillips, 149 N.H. 722 (2003)
Means v. Shyam Corp., 44 F.Supp.2d 129 (D.N.H. 1999)
Slattery v. Norwood Realty, Inc., 145
N.H. 447 (2001)
Society Hill at Merrimack Condominium Association v. Town of Merrimack,
139 N.H. 253 (1994)
Steir v. Girl Scouts of the United States,
218 F.Supp. 2d 58 (D.N.H. 2003)
Winterbrook Realty, Inc. v. FDIC, 820 F.Supp. 27 (D.N.H.
1993)