relative to judicial privilege and relative to the litigation of small claims.
Summary
HB 1116 makes two targeted changes to New Hampshire law. First, it creates a new section in RSA 516 providing that a judge may not invoke judicial privilege to refuse to testify in a criminal proceeding if the court finds, based on a proffer from the subpoenaing party, that the judge has firsthand knowledge of a material fact that is relevant and admissible. The bill defines “judge” broadly to include full-time and part-time judges of the supreme, superior, and circuit courts, recalled retired judges, full-time marital masters, and certain referees or special masters who perform judicial functions.
Second, the bill changes the notice procedure in small claims cases. It requires the court to send notice of the claim and its substance to the defendant within 10 days after the claim is filed, using first-class mail to the defendant’s last known address. The notice must direct the defendant to indicate in writing, within 30 days of mailing, whether they want to be heard. The act would take effect 60 days after passage.
Impact
The bill would amend RSA 516 and RSA 503, narrowing the ability of judicial officers to assert judicial privilege in criminal cases and imposing a specific 10-day deadline for court-issued notice in small claims litigation. Its practical effect would be to make certain judges and judicial officers potentially available as witnesses when they have direct, admissible knowledge of facts, while also speeding up the initiation of small claims proceedings and clarifying notice timing for defendants.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears procedural and narrowly focused rather than broadly controversial. There were no recorded committee transcripts or votes provided, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s structure suggests an intent to improve access to evidence in criminal cases and to streamline small claims notice practices.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the judicial privilege provision, because it limits a judge’s ability to decline testimony and could raise concerns about judicial independence, separation of powers, or the burden on judges being called as witnesses in criminal matters. Supporters would likely emphasize accountability and access to relevant firsthand evidence. The small claims notice change is less contentious, though parties involved in small claims practice may scrutinize whether the 10-day mailing requirement is administratively feasible for courts.