New Hampshire Attorneys Mcgrath Law Firm Concord NH

Efficiency, Excellence of Work Product, Zealous Representation

  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Divorce & Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Estate Planning Law
    • Business Law
    • Personal Injury Law
    • Criminal Defense Law
    • Civil Litigation
  • Meet Our Attorneys
    • Peter G. McGrath Attorney at law
    • Daniel J. Corley Attorney at Law
    • Tony Soltani Attorney at Law
    • John McKenna Jr., Attorney at Law
  • Legal Updates
  • Contact

Practice Areas

Personal Injury
Medical Malpractice
Complex Litigation
Civil Litigation
Real Estate Law
Business Law


Featured Posts

Homeowners Association Disputes: Navigate the Maze with McGrath Law Firm

Filing a Restraining Order in Charleston

October 1, 2014 By 201WAG

Ending a marriage or other type of long-term relationship can be difficult for all parties involved. Some divorces are quick, simple and even amicable, while others are carried out with bitterness and resentment. In these latter cases, some individuals might become violent or threatening toward their former spouse. If you are currently going through the divorce process and you’re worried that your former spouse might harm you in any way, consider filing for a restraining order against him or her. A restraining order is a court-ordered requirement that one individual not contact or come within a specified range of another for a specified length of time. You have the right to feel safe during and after the divorce process.

Steps to Filing a Restraining Order in South Carolina

In South Carolina, there are a few steps to the restraining order process.

First, contact an experienced divorce attorney to help you through this process. He or she will advocate for you and your safety while guiding you through the necessary legal actions to procure your restraining order.

Next, contact the magistrate court of the county where your former spouse resides. If your former spouse resides here in Charleston County, contact the magistrate court located in Charleston, South Carolina. All restraining orders are handled at this court level. If you are in immediate danger, the court can grant you a temporary restraining order within twenty-four hours. Otherwise, a hearing is held between five and fifteen days after the initial complaint, at which time the court hears the case and decides the appropriate course of action.

If the court decides that a restraining order is appropriate for the applicant and his or her former spouse, it may grant the applicant a restraining order for up to one year. If the applicant wishes to extend the restraining order, he or she must file official motions to do so within thirty days of its expiration.

Penalties for Violating a Restraining Order

A restraining order prohibits an individual from harassing or stalking the filer. The behaviors that constitute harassment and stalking, as well as their penalties, are defined in South Carolina Code 16-3-1700.

Harassment is any unreasonably repetitive behavior that distresses or otherwise negatively impacts an individual’s ability to freely conduct his or her chosen lifestyle. This can include persistent phone calls, vandalism of his or her property, continually following him or her, and surveillance of the individual. Stalking is defined as any pattern of words or conduct meant to scare an individual.

The penalties for violating a restraining order are a $500 fine and up to thirty days in jail.

Contact an Attorney with Experience in Restraining Orders

Nobody should have to live in fear of violence from their former spouse. If you’ve experienced any type of domestic harassment or stalking and want it to end, call the McGrath Law Firm at 843-606-2755 for your free legal consultation. You’ll have the opportunity to discuss the specific details of your case with one of our team’s attorneys and learn more about the restraining order process.

Filed Under: Legal Updates

Giving Back to the Community

September 24, 2014 By 201WAG

(MEP) Chase After a Cure Donation Picture

The staff at McGrath Law Firm are committed to serving our community. As a member of the Board of Directors for Chase After a Cure, attorney Matt Pecoy is corporate counsel for the non-profit organization, which is dedicated to children’s cancer research. On September 12, 2014, Chase After a Cure donated $130,000 to MUSC Children’s Hospital to assist the hospital with funding research labs which specialize in children’s cancer research. Since its inception in 2009, Chase After a Cure has donated more than $700,000 toward supporting local childhood cancer research. For more information, go to chaseafteracure.com.

Filed Under: Legal Updates

McGrath Law Firm Sponsors Chase After A Cure, Inc.’s Golf Tournament

September 22, 2014 By 201WAG

GolfThe McGrath Law Firm, PA continued to show its support for Chase After A Cure, Inc. by sponsoring a hole and foursome in its annual golf tournament on September 18, 2014 at Patriot’s Point Golf Course.  The team is pictured above and included Bradford Pelletier, Michael Perkins, Baron DeKalb (not pictured), and Matt Pecoy.   Mr. Pecoy is an associate at the McGrath Law Firm, serves as corporate counsel for Chase After A Cure, Inc., and sits on its Board of Directors.  Chase After A Cure, Inc. is a 501(c)3 that raises funds and awareness for neuroblastoma research.

Filed Under: Legal Updates

Fatal Accidents and the Fear of Flying

September 13, 2014 By 201WAG

Share your airplane anxiety with anyone and you will inevitably get the “but flying is the safest way to travel!” response. While flying remains among the safest ways to travel, the recent Malaysia airlines crashes have only raised fears in already weary airplane travellers. Even closer to home, a Mount Pleasant based private plane recently crashed, killing the two occupants—a not-so-subtle reminder that the dangers of flying still exist.

Twenty-year-old flight student Matthew Gaither was piloting a Cessna 150 when it went down immediatelyafter take off. Both he and his flight instructor, Graham Borland, died upon impact. Gaither, a Navy Seal hopeful, had just begun pilot training a week prior to the accident, and was likely the one operating the plane at the time of the crash. The National Transportation Safety Board began its investigation last week, but no cause of the accident has been reported to media outlets. As of today, no charges have been filed by either Gaither or Borland regarding the crash.

Aviation Accidents

Due to the speed, velocity, and height when airborne, aviation accidents are among the most devastating of all catastrophic events. Filed usually as catastrophic injury or wrongful death claims, aviation lawsuits are complex, time-consuming, and require significant expertise both in the area of aviation and in complex litigation. In the event of a death, it is usually the decedent’s estate that brings the legal claim. The estate can seek damages for the wrongful death action and ultimately recover for things such as pain and suffering, funeral expenses, medical expenses, loss of earning capacity, or emotional distress.

If awarded, these fees are paid out by the responsible parties. In an aviation lawsuit, the possible causes of an accident are numerous and may be attributed to any number of separate parties. In addition to the people responsible for flying the plane, other actors include:

  • Air traffic controllers at the airport and other airport staff;
  • The airplane company or manufacturer;
  • Parts manufacturers or mechanics;
  • Charter companies; and
  • Private plane owners.

The ultimate determination of what happened in an aviation accident can take years, and blame can be difficult to place. Therefore, settlements are common in this area of the law.

South Carolina Aviation

The August 14, 2014 plane crash was not the first in South Carolina this year. Three people died in March, two in May, and there was a non-fatal crash in April, all in small, private planes. Worldwide, 2014 has not been a good year for those travelling by airplane. In the first two months of 2014 alone, nearly 400 people died in plane crashes, compared to less than 500 in all of year 2013 combined. While this may seem like an astronomical number to those of us that already fear flying, according to a 2013 New York Times article, flying is still the way to go. With your chances of dying in a plane crash around 1 in 11 million in comparison to the odds of dying in a car crash around 1 in 5,000, flying (especially on commercial airlines) really does remain the safest way to travel.

Next Steps

Deciding to bring a legal claim after an aviation accident can be complicated, time-consuming, and overwhelming. If you or anyone you know has been injured in an aviation accident or any other catastrophic accident, you need experienced attorneys that can help guide you through the process. Contact the knowledgeable catastrophic injury attorneys at the McGrath Law Firm that will wholly dedicate themselves to your case. Serving Columbia, South Carolina and neighboring communities, we are here to give you and your families the representation you deserve.

Filed Under: Legal Updates

Should creditors renew their New Hampshire attachments?

September 12, 2014 By

The question of should creditors renew their New Hampshire attachments is often raised?
In the recent  case of Trinity EMS, INC. v. Timothy Coombs, the New Hampshire Supreme Court resolved the issue of what a creditor can do when his judgment lasts longer than his attachment on the debtor’s property.

Under New Hampshire law, a creditor has a right to enforce a judgment for 20 years.  One of the ways to enforce the judgment is to obtain an attachment on the debtor’s property and if the debtor sells her property under certain circumstances, the creditor may satisfy his judgment from the proceeds of the sale.   However, an attachment under New Hampshire law is only valid for 6 years, leaving the creditor unprotected for potentially 14 years.

In the Trinity case, the creditor’s attorney basically brought a new lawsuit to obtain a new judgment based on the unpaid balance of the existing judgment so the creditor could obtain a new attachment for an additional 6 year period of time.  The lower court dismissed the new lawsuit basically asserting the debtor still disputed the original judgment and it was improper to bring a new lawsuit to obtain an attachment.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court sided with the creditors’ attorney, reversed the lower court and found a creditor could bring a new lawsuit for the purpose of obtaining a new judgment for the purpose of obtaining a new attachment.

The Trinity case serves as a reminder for creditors to review the status of their attachments and make a business decision on whether the attachments should be renewed.

To learn more about how to use attachments  to protect your business or learn more about your legal rights, contact an experienced and results oriented attorney at the McGrath Law Firm, PA. To make an appointment, call (603) 224-7111 or (800) 283-1380, or visit www.mcgrathlawfirm.com.

 

Filed Under: Legal Updates

Should creditors renew their New Hampshire attachments?

September 12, 2014 By

The question of should creditors renew their New Hampshire attachments is often raised?
In the recent  case of Trinity EMS, INC. v. Timothy Coombs, the New Hampshire Supreme Court resolved the issue of what a creditor can do when his judgment lasts longer than his attachment on the debtor’s property.

Under New Hampshire law, a creditor has a right to enforce a judgment for 20 years.  One of the ways to enforce the judgment is to obtain an attachment on the debtor’s property and if the debtor sells her property under certain circumstances, the creditor may satisfy his judgment from the proceeds of the sale.   However, an attachment under New Hampshire law is only valid for 6 years, leaving the creditor unprotected for potentially 14 years.

In the Trinity case, the creditor’s attorney basically brought a new lawsuit to obtain a new judgment based on the unpaid balance of the existing judgment so the creditor could obtain a new attachment for an additional 6 year period of time.  The lower court dismissed the new lawsuit basically asserting the debtor still disputed the original judgment and it was improper to bring a new lawsuit to obtain an attachment.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court sided with the creditors’ attorney, reversed the lower court and found a creditor could bring a new lawsuit for the purpose of obtaining a new judgment for the purpose of obtaining a new attachment.

The Trinity case serves as a reminder for creditors to review the status of their attachments and make a business decision on whether the attachments should be renewed.

To learn more about how to use attachments  to protect your business or learn more about your legal rights, contact an experienced and results oriented attorney at the McGrath Law Firm, PA. To make an appointment, call (603) 224-7111 or (800) 283-1380, or visit www.mcgrathlawfirm.com.

 

Filed Under: Legal Updates

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Practice Areas

  • Divorce & Family Law
  • Criminal Defense
  • Personal Injury Law
  • Civil Litigation
  • Real Estate Law
  • Business Law
  • Estate Planning Law

Sign Up For McGrath Law Firm Newsletter

Download Our Newsletter

Featured Posts

Homeowners Association Disputes: Navigate the Maze with McGrath Law Firm

Why You Need to Have a Will and Estate Plan in Place at a Younger Age

Our Story

Practice Areas

Divorce and Family Law
Probate Matters
Civil Litigation
Mediation
Collaborative Law Practice
Consultations

EDUCATION
Boston College Law School, J.D.
Harvard University, M.A.
Emmanuel College, B.A.

ADMISSIONS
New Hampshire
Massachusetts
US District Court, New Hampshire
US District Court, Massachusetts

AFFILIATIONS
Collaborative Law Alliance of
New Hampshire (CLANH)
International Academy of Collaborative
Professionals (IACP)
NH Bar Association:
Alternative Dispute Resolution Section
Family Law Section

Practice Areas

Divorce and Family Law
Criminal Defense
Personal Injury
Civil Litigation
Real Estate Law
Business Law


Featured Posts

Homeowners Association Disputes: Navigate the Maze with McGrath Law Firm

Back to Top

Copyright © 2025 McGrath Law Firm Concord NH | Visit South Carolina site


McGrath Law Firm, PA presents the content of this website for informational purposes only. The contents may not reflect the most current legal developments and may not indicate future results. The contents of this website should not be construed as legal advice. McGrath Law Firm does not intend that delivery of this material, receipt of this material, or inquiry emails create any attorney-client relationship. You should not make decisions based upon this information without consulting an attorney. McGrath Law Firm is not responsible for and does not necessarily approve of the materials contained on linked websites.