New Hampshire Theme Park Injury Lawyer

How New Hampshire Law Frames a Theme Park Injury

When an injury happens at a park in New Hampshire, New Hampshire law usually supplies the rules for the claim, including the filing periods, the fault rule and the wrongful death rules discussed below. The Florida theme park rules, for example, are not New Hampshire's, so an account of another state's ride case says little about a case arising here.

Three legal ideas do most of the work.

• Negligence means a failure to use reasonable care that causes harm. A claim asks whether there was a duty, whether it was breached, and whether the breach caused the injury and the losses that followed.
• Premises liability is negligence applied to property. It asks whether the owner or occupier of a place kept it reasonably safe for the people it invited in.
• Product liability concerns the things themselves, such as a ride, a car, a harness or a part. It asks whether a product was defective and whether that defect caused the harm.

A fall on a slick surface points toward premises liability. A mechanical failure may raise product liability. Some incidents involve both. For someone who was hurt, the stakes are practical: the theory shapes which deadline applies and who the claim is aimed at.

Filing Deadlines Under New Hampshire Law

The main filing period appears in section 508:4 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated. Except as otherwise provided by law, all personal actions other than slander or libel "may be brought only within 3 years of the act or omission complained of."

The statute then states one exception, known as the discovery rule. Sometimes the injury, and its connection to what happened, "were not discovered and could not reasonably have been discovered" at the time. In that case, the action must be commenced within three years of when the plaintiff discovers, or with reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury and its causal relationship to the act or omission. This can matter after a ride incident when symptoms surface later. The site's page on roller coaster brain injury describes one example of an injury that may not be obvious at first. Whether the discovery rule applies depends on the facts.

A different rule applies to children. The chapter 508 text published by the New Hampshire General Court provides that "an infant or mentally incompetent person may bring a personal action within 2 years after such disability is removed." The text appears on the Chapter 508 page. For a parent whose child was hurt at a park, this means the child's own claim runs on a separate clock from the three-year rule. That clock begins when the disability is removed.

These periods mark the point after which the right to bring the action can be lost. This page cannot say where any reader stands against them. Product liability claims and claims against governmental units have their own rules, covered below.

How Theme Park and Amusement Park Injuries Happen

Park injuries in New Hampshire tend to fall into two broad groups.

The first group involves the rides themselves. Roller coasters, spinning and swinging mechanical rides, and water rides and slides can produce injuries from sudden stops, jolts, unexpected movement, a restraint that does not hold, or a part that fails. The site's ride accident statistics page discusses what national data records about these attractions. That data does not describe any New Hampshire park or explain any single incident.

The second group involves the grounds: falls on wet surfaces near water attractions, uneven walkways and steps, crowded queue areas, and other property conditions away from any ride.

The mechanism points toward the theory and the defendant. A component failure may raise a product question aimed at a manufacturer. A walkway hazard raises a premises question aimed at whoever controlled that ground. An injury, however serious, does not by itself prove that anyone was at fault or that a ride was defective. How the injury happened is often the first thing an attorney asks about, because it decides which rules and which parties come into play.

The records that usually matter include medical records, photos and video of the ride or spot, any incident report the park prepared, the names of witnesses, and the identity of the ride, seat or area involved. Families after a serious injury often keep tickets, receipts and anything given to them at the scene.

Who May Be Responsible for Your Injury

Responsibility in a park case is often shared or disputed. New Hampshire's comparative fault statute, discussed below, speaks of fault measured against "the defendants in the aggregate if recovery is allowed against more than one defendant." That wording shows the law expects that more than one party may be involved.

The usual categories are these:

• The park owner or operator, under premises liability, for the condition of the grounds and the running of the park.
• The ride operator, meaning the business or employee that runs a ride day to day: loading riders, checking seating and starting and stopping the ride.
• The ride manufacturer or a component maker, under product liability. This includes the maker of a ride restraint, which is the lap bar, harness, belt or other device meant to hold a rider in place.
• A maintenance or inspection contractor, where a separate company serviced the equipment.

Which of these parties carries responsibility depends on who controlled what and what actually failed, and the answer is often unclear at first. Each party may bring a different theory and a different deadline, so sorting out who ran, built and serviced the ride is a common early topic in a conversation with an attorney.

A government-run facility adds a step. Under section 507-B:7 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated, an action against a governmental unit must be commenced within three years after the injury, with the same discovery exception. As a condition before the action begins, "the clerk of the governmental unit shall be notified by registered mail within 60 days" of the injury, or of its discovery if it could not reasonably have been discovered sooner. The notice must state the date, time and location of the injury. Where the governmental unit alleges that notice was missing, it bears the burden of showing it was substantially prejudiced. The statute sets a separate rule for actions based on the offenses listed in its paragraph II.

When the Park Says You Were Partly at Fault: Comparative Fault

Parks sometimes argue that a rider ignored a rule or that a guest was not watching their step. New Hampshire answers that argument with comparative fault, which means weighing each side's share of blame instead of treating any blame on the injured person as the end of the case. Section 507:7-d of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated provides:

"Contributory fault shall not bar recovery in an action by any plaintiff or plaintiff's legal representative, to recover damages in tort for death, personal injury or property damage, if such fault was not greater than the fault of the defendant, or the defendants in the aggregate if recovery is allowed against more than one defendant, but the damages awarded shall be diminished in proportion to the amount of fault attributed to the plaintiff by general verdict."

In plain words, an injured person's own share of fault does not end the claim unless it is greater than the defendant's share, or greater than the combined share of all defendants where there are several. Any damages are then reduced by that person's share. The statute also places "the burden of proof as to the existence or amount of fault attributable to a party" on whoever makes the allegation. A park that claims the guest was careless has to prove it.

A waiver is a document, often signed at entry or online, in which a guest agrees to give up or limit certain claims. Its effect is not automatic in either direction. What it covers, and whether it holds, depends on its wording, the facts of the injury and how New Hampshire law treats it.

When a Ride or Restraint Fails: Product Liability Deadlines

If a ride, restraint or part seems to have failed, the question shifts from how the park kept its grounds to whether the equipment itself was defective and whether that defect caused the injury. Both theories can apply to the same incident, for example where a restraint fails on a ride the park also operated. A failure does not prove a defect.

New Hampshire sets its own deadlines for these claims in section 507-D:2 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated. "Notwithstanding any other provision of law," a product liability action must meet two limits.

1. The action must be brought within three years of when the injury is, or with reasonable diligence should have been, discovered by the plaintiff. 2. The action must also be brought within an outer limit: - Generally, no later than 12 years after the manufacturer of the final product parted with its possession and control or sold it, whichever occurred last. - Against a lessor, bailor or licensor that has a legal duty to inspect, maintain, repair, modify, alter or improve the product, no later than 12 years after it stops having use, possession or control or stops being under that duty. - Where the claim rests on a duty imposed later by a governmental regulatory agency, such as a duty to recall, repair or warn, no longer than 6 years after the defendant first incurred that duty. This rule does not shorten the 12-year periods.

Claims for indemnity or contribution get the same periods plus 90 days. These limits do not apply to actions based on fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment or nondisclosure, to actions under a written contract that provides a different period, or to certain warranty actions that do not seek damages for injury to person or property.

For an injured rider, the practical point is that two clocks run at once: one tied to when the injury was discovered, and one tied to the age and history of the ride itself. A guest rarely knows when a ride was built, sold or leased, or who was responsible for keeping it up. Working out who made, leased or serviced the equipment, and when, is often one of the first things an attorney looks into.

Free Public Land and Recreational-Use Protection: When It Applies

New Hampshire limits the liability of some landowners who open their land to the public. Under section 508:14 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated, "an owner, occupant, or lessee of land, including the state or any political subdivision, who without charge permits any person to use land for recreational purposes or as a spectator of recreational activity, shall not be liable for personal injury or property damage in the absence of intentionally caused injury or damage." A voluntary contribution, meaning a payment not required in order to use the land, is not a charge.

The key condition is "without charge." A park that sells admission or ride tickets raises a different question from free public land. Whether this protection reaches a particular commercial park depends on the facts, including what was paid and for what, and on how courts apply the statute.

If an injury happened on a public trail or at a pick-your-own farm rather than inside a park, different standards apply: trail builders and maintainers are protected absent gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct, and pick-your-own farms absent willful, wanton or reckless conduct.

For someone who was hurt, this matters because, where the statute applies, it can shut out an ordinary negligence claim. If a park or its insurer raises it, the questions that usually follow are simple ones: how entry worked, what was paid, and where the injury happened. Talking through the incident with our attorney can help sort out whether the statute is part of the picture at all.

When a Family Loses Someone: Wrongful Death Under New Hampshire Law

Wrongful death means a death caused by another's wrongful act or neglect. In New Hampshire, the claim is brought through the estate. Section 556:12 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated addresses the case where "the administrator of the deceased party is plaintiff." An administrator is the person appointed to manage the deceased person's estate.

For a family, the statute describes what the estate's case can look at, considered "in the same manner as if the deceased had survived":

• The mental and physical pain the person suffered because of the injury.
• The reasonable expenses the injury caused the estate.
• The probable duration of life but for the injury.
• The person's capacity to earn money during their probable working life.

Section 556:12 also allows two added categories, each with a limit:

• A surviving spouse may be awarded damages for the loss of the comfort, society and companionship of the deceased. These damages may not exceed $500,000.
• Where the person who died was a parent of a minor child, the children may be awarded damages for loss of familial relationship. The same applies to the surviving parents where a minor child died. The statute defines that loss to include comfort, society, affection, guidance and companionship. These damages may not exceed $300,000 per individual claimant.

Both added categories may be reduced for fault under the comparative fault statute. The statute page lists amendments effective January 1, 1999 and January 1, 2025.

These limits apply to these wrongful death categories. They are not a general cap on injury damages. For a grieving family, early questions often include who will serve as administrator and which family members fall within these categories.