Opinion
No. 78-030
Decided February 6, 1978
Nuisance — Abatement Supplemental statutory remedy did not deprive superior court of its general equity powers and motion to dismiss city's petition to abate nuisance, alleged to have been created by fire-damaged building, should not have been granted. RSA 155-B:2 (Supp. 1975), :14 (Supp. 1975).
James A. Manning, of Manchester, by brief and orally for the plaintiff.
Cullity Kelley, of Manchester (George W. Roussos orally), for the defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The city's petition to abate a nuisance, RSA 47:17 XIV, alleged to have been created by a fire-damaged building was dismissed by the Superior Court (DiClerico, J.) this date on motion on the ground that RSA 155-B:2 (Supp. 1975) deprived the superior court of its equity jurisdiction over the subject matter. RSA 498:1. Because of the urgency of the matter, we expedited oral argument and rule that the remedy provided by RSA 155-B:2 (Supp. 1975) provides a supplemental remedy and does not deprive the superior court of its general equity powers. RSA 155-B:14 (Supp. 1975).
The motion to dismiss should not therefore have been granted.
Exceptions sustained; remanded.