Dennis G. Huckins
Mark McSweeney & a
Argued February 12, 2014.
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
U.S. District Court.
Douglas, Leonard & Garvey, P.C., of Concord ( Charles G. Douglas, III on the brief and orally), for the plaintiff.
Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, of Concord ( Charles P. Bauer and Samantha D. Elliott on the brief, and Mr. Bauer orally), for the defendants.
CONBOY, J. DALIANIS, C.J., and HICKS and BASSETT, JJ., concurred.
[166 N.H. 178] Conboy, J.
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 34, the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire ( DiClerico, J.) certified the following question for our consideration:
Whether RSA 507-B:2 and RSA 507-B:5 are constitutional under Part I, Article 14 of the New Hampshire Constitution, to the extent they prevent recovery for Plaintiff's claim for civil battery and damages against the Town of Sanbornton under a theory of respondeat superior.
We respond in the affirmative.
The federal district court's order provides the following facts. See Eng Khabbaz v. Comm'r, Social Sec. Admin., 155 N.H. 798, 799, 930 A.2d 1180 (2007). This case arises fro a municipal police officer's use of a stun gun during a field sobriety test. The plaintiff, Dennis G. Huckins, alleges that the police officer, defendant Mark McSweeney, used his stun gun on him " multiple times." McSweeney asserts that he ...