What Is My Personal Injury Case Worth in New Hampshire?
- Keith Diaz
- Apr 29
- 8 min read
Insurance companies calculate their first offer to protect their bottom line — not yours. Apis Law solves that problem: Attorney Keith F. Diaz has 22 years of trial work and knows what your personal injury case is actually worth under New Hampshire law. We use our local trial experience to get you what is rightfully yours.
If you were injured in New Hampshire by another driver, a property owner, or in a workplace accident, and an insurance adjuster has already called you with a number, this article is for you.
This article breaks down how personal injury claims are calculated under NH law, how insurance companies undercut it, and what Apis Law does about it. Our published case results show the framework in practice. Your New Hampshire Personal Injury case is worth the sum of every category of loss New Hampshire law authorizes you to recover, reduced by any percentage of fault attributed to you.
The Six Categories of Damages New Hampshire Law Provides
Under New Hampshire law, a jury deciding a personal injury case may award damages for each of the following independently:
Past medical expenses (hospital, surgical, rehabilitation)
Future medical expenses reasonably probable to be required
Past lost wages from the date of injury through trial
Loss of earning capacity: the diminished ability to earn in the future, separate from past wages
Pain and suffering: past and future physical pain, discomfort, fears, anxiety, and emotional distress
Loss of enjoyment of life: the inability to carry on life in the manner you would have had the accident not occurred
No first offer made in the first 30 days of a claim credibly prices all six.
Future medical expenses require a specialist's opinion. Loss of earning capacity requires evidence of how the injury impairs your ability to work. Pain and suffering require a sustained medical record. Insurance adjusters know this, and they move quickly before that record exists.
Comparative Fault: How RSA 507:7-d Reduces Recovery
New Hampshire follows modified comparative fault under RSA 507:7-d. If you are 50% or less at fault, you recover damages reduced by your fault percentage. If you are more than 50% at fault, you recover nothing.
If a jury finds your damages are $100,000 and your fault is 20%, you recover $80,000. If your fault is 51%, you recover zero.
Here is what the insurance adjuster does not tell you: the adjuster's assessment of your fault percentage has no binding legal effect. "You were 40% responsible" is a negotiating position, not a legal determination.
Only a jury verdict or a settlement you agree to fixes your percentage. In Broughton v. Proulx, 152 N.H. 549, 880 A.2d 388 (2005), the NH Supreme Court confirmed that a plaintiff is entitled to place reliance on a defendant's duty of care, and that proving comparative fault requires the defendant to show the plaintiff failed to exercise care and that the failure was a substantial factor in causing the injury.
What Works and What Does Not
What Works
Seeking medical treatment immediately after the accident and continuing consistently through maximum medical improvement
Getting specialist evaluation (orthopedic, neurological, or otherwise) to document the full scope of injury
Preserving evidence from day one: photographs of the scene, vehicle damage, injury, and any conditions the insurer will later dispute
Retaining counsel before giving any recorded statement to the opposing carrier
What Does Not Work
Accepting the first offer, which is priced against a medical record that does not yet exist
Giving a recorded statement before the full extent of your injuries is known
Letting months pass without treatment, which creates a gap that the insurer will use to argue your injuries resolved on their own
Do not assume that a prior injury eliminates your claim. Under New Hampshire law, it does not.
A Preexisting Condition Does Not Bar Your Recovery in New Hampshire
This is the most common misrepresentation adjusters make. Under New Hampshire law, a plaintiff may recover for any aggravation of a preexisting condition caused by the accident. In Peterson v. Gray, 137 N.H. 374, 628 A.2d 244 (1993), the NH Supreme Court held that a misleading instruction on preexisting conditions constitutes reversible error, underscoring the central role this rule plays in NH personal injury law.
The special susceptibility rule, found in NH Civil Jury Instruction NS9.103, goes further: if you were more likely to suffer injury because of a prior condition, the defendant is still responsible for that injury. A defendant cannot reduce liability by showing a healthier person would not have been hurt.
A history of back or neck problems that were asymptomatic before the accident is not a defense. It is often a factor that increases the value of the aggravation claim.
Future Damages Are Often the Largest Part of a Serious Case
New Hampshire law requires that future damages be "more probable than not," not certain, but probable. In Stachulski v. Apple New England, 171 N.H. 158 (2018), the NH Supreme Court confirmed that loss of enjoyment of life and future pain and suffering are available where the evidence supports them, and extended that availability to non-permanent as well as permanent impairments.
In Bennett v. Lembo, 145 N.H. 276, 761 A.2d 494 (2000), the Court held that loss of enjoyment of life is recoverable as a component of permanent impairment. This is separate from pain and suffering. A plaintiff who can no longer ski, play with their children, or do work they formerly enjoyed may recover for that loss independently.
Loss of earning capacity is also separate from lost wages. In Vachon v. New England Towing, Inc., 148 N.H. 429, 809 A.2d 771 (2002), the Court confirmed that the measure is what the plaintiff would have earned if not injured, and requires evidence showing how the injury actually impairs earning power. This is one of the most undervalued categories in self-represented claims.
Apis Law Case Results: What the Formula Looks Like in Practice
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case depends on its own facts, injury severity, insurance coverage, and applicable law. The following results from Apis Law's public case record show how the framework above plays out in actual New Hampshire cases.
$280,000: I-93 Truck Accident, Manchester / Southern NH | A delivery driver struck on I-93 by a commercial vehicle suffered a TFCC wrist tear requiring surgery and was out of work for ten months. Apis Law eliminated a phantom third-vehicle defense, maintained unbroken medical documentation from ER through surgery, and negotiated the workers' compensation lien down to preserve the net recovery.
$275,000: Construction Site Sheetrock Collapse, Milford, NH | A 20-year-old worker was crushed by 1,800 pounds of falling sheetrock, suffering three ankle fractures, an ACL tear, and bilateral meniscus tears. Apis Law retained biomechanical experts, pursued multiple defendants under RSA 507:7-d, and connected a delayed knee failure 18 months post-accident to the original incident through surgical evidence.
$100,000 (Policy Limits): Head-On Collision with Cardiac Injury, New Boston, NH | A head-on collision caused cardiac contusions initially dismissed as chest pain, evolving into dangerous electrical disturbances that required invasive cardiac ablation. Apis Law connected the delayed cardiac symptoms to the collision through medical expert testimony and secured full policy limits, demonstrating the critical importance of adequate UM/UIM coverage under RSA 264:15.
$95,000: Manchester Car Accident with Treatment Gap | An insurer argued that a significant gap in medical treatment proved the injuries were not serious. Apis Law retained medical experts to explain the gap, filed suit to demonstrate litigation readiness, and compelled a $95,000 settlement after the insurer's initial lowball offer.
$31,000: Whiplash with No Permanent Impairment, New Boston, NH | The insurer offered $13,000 for a whiplash injury with full recovery. Apis Law applied the common fund doctrine to reduce the $6,000 health insurance subrogation lien by over $2,000, secured Med Pay benefits, and rebuilt the narrative around the full scope of disruption rather than medical bills alone, more than doubling the recovery.
Full case summaries, including the court, key statute, and firm strategy for each matter, are available at apislaw.com/case-results.
How Apis Law Evaluates Your Case
Attorney Keith F. Diaz personally evaluates every case the firm takes. There is no intake paralegal and no call center. When you describe your accident, Attorney Diaz assesses liability, the six categories of available damages, insurance coverage, and the defenses the carrier is likely to raise. You receive a candid opinion, not a sales pitch.
Apis Law has 22 years of New Hampshire trial experience, a published appellate opinion from the NH Supreme Court in Graham v. Eurosim Construction, and a public case results record you can review before making any decision. The evaluation is free. The firm handles personal injury cases on a contingency fee basis: no fees unless Apis Law recovers for you.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is my personal injury case worth in New Hampshire?
Your case is worth the sum of all recoverable losses under New Hampshire law, reduced by any percentage of fault attributed to you. Under NH Civil Jury Instruction 9.6, those categories are: past medical expenses, future medical expenses, past lost wages, loss of earning capacity, pain and suffering (past and future), and loss of enjoyment of life. An insurance company's first offer rarely accounts for future damages or loss of earning capacity.
Does a preexisting condition reduce what my case is worth in New Hampshire?
No. Under NH Civil Jury Instruction 9.12 and Peterson v. Gray, 137 N.H. 374 (1993), a plaintiff may recover for any aggravation of a preexisting condition caused by the accident. A prior injury that was stable or asymptomatic before the accident and worsened by it is compensable. The special susceptibility rule in NS9.103 goes further: if you were more likely to be injured because of a prior condition, the defendant is still fully responsible.
How does comparative fault affect my case?
Under RSA 507:7-d, if you are found 50% or less at fault, your damages are reduced by your fault percentage. If you are found more than 50% at fault, you recover nothing. An adjuster's assertion of your fault percentage has no binding legal effect. It is a negotiating position. Only a jury verdict or a settlement you agree to fixes the number. Broughton v. Proulx, 152 N.H. 549 (2005), confirmed that the defendant bears the burden of proving the plaintiff's comparative fault.
How is pain and suffering calculated in New Hampshire?
There is no fixed formula. Under NH Civil Jury Instruction 9.6, pain and suffering includes physical pain, discomfort, fears, anxiety, mental and emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life. The jury exercises judgment based on the evidence. In Duguay v. Gelinas, 104 N.H. 182 (1962), the NH Supreme Court held that per-diem arguments are not permitted, but counsel may argue a specific lump sum under Rodriguez v. Webb, 141 N.H. 177 (1996). In Bennett v. Lembo, 145 N.H. 276 (2000), the Court confirmed that loss of enjoyment of life is recoverable as a separate component of permanent impairment.
What is loss of earning capacity and how is it different from lost wages?
Lost wages are the earnings you missed from the date of injury through the present. Loss of earning capacity is your diminished ability to earn in the future as a result of the injury, a distinct and separately compensable item under Vachon v. New England Towing, Inc., 148 N.H. 429 (2002). To recover, the evidence must show not only a permanent injury but how that injury limits your earning power. This category is frequently undervalued in self-represented or quickly settled claims.
External Legal Resources
About the Author
Keith F. Diaz, Esq. is the founder of Apis Law, PLLC, a New Hampshire personal injury law firm. Attorney Diaz has 22 years of legal experience and is admitted to practice in the State of New Hampshire (Bar No. 15831), the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, and the First Circuit Court of Appeals. He founded Apis Law in 2022 to provide dedicated, client-focused representation to individuals and families throughout New Hampshire. Visit Attorney Bio.
Comments