(a) Interlocutory Appeals. Whenever any question of law is to be transferred by interlocutory appeal from a ruling or by interlocutory transfer without ruling, counsel shall seasonably prepare and file with the trial court the interlocutory appeal statement or interlocutory transfer statement pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 8 or Supreme Court Rule 9, and after the court has signed the statement, counsel shall mail the number of copies provided for by the rules of the Supreme Court to the clerk thereof.
Rule 46.Appeals and Transfers to Supreme Court
Group VIII: Judgment · Last amended January 1, 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 46 governs interlocutory appeals and transfers, appeals from denial of personal-jurisdiction or service motions, certification of partial final judgments in multi-claim or multi-party cases, and the timing that fixes when final judgment is deemed entered after a verdict, decree, or post-verdict motion.
Full Text of Rule 46
(b) Denial of Motion to Dismiss Challenging Personal Jurisdiction, Process and/or Service of Process. When, pursuant to Rule 9(e), a party files a timely Motion to Dismiss challenging the court's personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process and/or sufficiency of service of process and the motion is denied, the order denying the motion may be appealed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 7. See Rule 9(e) (a party will be deemed to have waived a challenge to personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process and/or sufficiency of service if the party does not seek review by the supreme court of the denial of the Motion to Dismiss within 30 days; the supreme court's declining to accept the appeal will not preclude the party from challenging the trial court's ruling on personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process and/or sufficiency of service of process in an appeal from a final judgment of the trial court).
(c) Judgment on Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Parties.
(1) When, in a civil action that presents more than one claim for relief - whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third party claim - or where multiple parties are involved, the court enters an order that finally resolves the case as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties, the court may direct that its order, or a portion of its order, be treated as a final decision on the merits as to those claims or parties if the court:
(A) explicitly refers to this rule;
(B) identifies the specific order or part thereof that is to be treated as a final decision on the merits;
(C) articulates the reasons and factors warranting such treatment; and
(D) finds that there is an absence of any just reason for delay as to the party or claim that is to be severed from the remainder of the case.
An order bifurcating or otherwise severing a civil action shall not, by itself, result in any order being treated as an appealable final decision on the merits unless all of the requirements of Rule 46(c)(1) are met.
(2) Procedure on Appeal.
(A) Any appeal from such an order shall be considered a mandatory appeal for purposes of Supreme Court Rule 7 if a final decision on the merits of the entire case would be a mandatory appeal, and shall be filed in accordance with Supreme Court Rules.
(B) Prior to accepting an appeal from an order that the Superior Court directed be treated as a final decision on the merits pursuant to Rule 46(c)(1), the Supreme Court may review the trial court's reasons and factors warranting treating the order as a final decision on the merits. If the Supreme Court determines, after notice to the parties and an opportunity for the filing of brief memoranda, that the Superior Court clearly erred by directing that the order be treated as a final decision on the merits, the Supreme Court shall vacate the portion of the order directing that it be treated as a final decision on the merits, and otherwise dismiss the appeal without prejudice.
(d) Final Judgment. In all actions in which a verdict or decree is entered, or in which a motion for a nonsuit or directed verdict is granted, or in which any motion is acted upon after verdict or decree, all appeals relating to the action shall be deemed waived and final judgment shall be entered as follows, unless the court has otherwise ordered, or unless a Notice of Appeal has then been filed with the Supreme Court pursuant to its Rule 7:
(1) Where no motion, or an untimely filed motion, has been filed after verdict or decree, on the 31st day from the date on the court's written notice that the court has made the aforementioned entry, grant or dismissal; or
(2) Where a timely filed motion has been filed after verdict or decree, on the 31st day from the date on the court's written notice that the court has taken action on the motion.
Comment
Rule 46(b), consistent with Rule 9(e) and Mosier v. Kinley, 142 N.H. 415, 423-24 (1997), provides that an order denying a timely-filed Motion to Dismiss challenging personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process and/or sufficiency of service shall be appealable under Supreme Court Rule 7 without the need for the Superior Court to take the actions set forth in Rule 46(c)(1). Rule 46(c)(1) alters the rule announced in Germain v. Germain, 137 N.H. 83, 85 (1993), that "when a trial court issues an order that does not conclude the proceedings before it, for example, by deciding some but not all issues in the proceedings or by entering judgment with respect to some but not all parties to the action, we consider any appeal from such an order to be interlocutory." Rule 46(c)(1) authorizes the Superior Court to designate certain orders that do not conclude the proceedings before it as final decisions on the merits that can be immediately appealed to the Supreme Court. In Germain, the Supreme Court indicated that under some circumstances, an order bifurcating a case might suffice to convert otherwise interlocutory orders into final decisions on the merits. Rule 46(c)(1), however, explicitly provides that a bifurcation order alone will no longer suffice; rather, the Superior Court must comply with the requirements of Rule 46(c)(1)(A) through (D) if the court intends for an order that finally resolves the case as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties to be treated as a final decision on the merits as to those claims or parties. Rule 46(c)(2) provides that, prior to accepting the appeal, the Supreme Court may review the Superior Court's findings under Rule 46(c)(1)(C) and (D). If, after providing the parties with the opportunity to file brief memoranda, the Supreme Court concludes that the Superior Court clearly erred in its conclusion that the order should be treated as a final decision on the merits, the Supreme Court shall vacate that part of the order and otherwise dismiss the appeal. The dismissal of the appeal is without prejudice to any party's ability to file an appeal after the entire action is concluded in the Superior Court.
Amendment History
Adopted May 22, 2013, eff. October 1, 2013; amended October 17, 2016, eff. January 1, 2017.
2016: The 2016 amendment added the subsection headings of (a) and (d); added (b) and (c); redesignated former (b) through (e) as (d) through (g); and added the Comment.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 46 opens with interlocutory appeals: when a legal question is to go up to the Supreme Court by interlocutory appeal from a ruling, or by interlocutory transfer without a ruling, counsel prepares and files the interlocutory appeal or transfer statement under Supreme Court Rule 8 or 9, and once the trial court signs it, counsel mails the required copies to the Supreme Court clerk. Separately, when a timely motion to dismiss challenging personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process, or sufficiency of service is denied, that denial can be appealed under Supreme Court Rule 7; under Rule 9(e), failing to seek that review within 30 days waives the challenge, though if the Supreme Court declines to accept the appeal, the party can still raise the trial court's ruling in an appeal from the final judgment.
The rule also lets the superior court certify part of a case as final. In an action with more than one claim or more than one party, if the court's order finally resolves some but not all of the claims or parties, the court can direct that the order be treated as a final decision on the merits, but only if it refers to this rule, identifies the specific order or part being certified, states its reasons, and finds no just reason for delay. An order bifurcating or severing a case doesn't create an appealable final order on its own; all four requirements have to be met. Before accepting such an appeal, the Supreme Court may review the trial court's stated reasons, and if it finds the trial court clearly erred in certifying the order as final, it vacates that part of the order and dismisses the appeal without prejudice.
Finally, the rule fixes when final judgment is deemed entered. In any action where a verdict or decree is entered, a motion for nonsuit or directed verdict is granted, or any motion is acted upon after verdict or decree, all appeal rights are deemed waived and final judgment enters on the 31st day after the court's written notice of that verdict, grant, or ruling on a timely post-verdict motion, unless the court has ordered otherwise or a notice of appeal is already on file with the Supreme Court. The superior court won't grant extensions of time or late-entry requests for Supreme Court appeal documents; those go to the Supreme Court itself under its Rule 21(6). In a case ending in mistrial, an appeal from denial of a nonsuit or directed-verdict motion doesn't go up before the verdict following further trial unless the court approves an interlocutory appeal. Transcript preparation for an appealed or transferred case follows Supreme Court Rule 15.
Frequently Asked Questions
What's the difference between an interlocutory appeal and a Rule 46(c) certified final judgment?
An interlocutory appeal or transfer under (a) sends a legal question up mid-case through a signed statement under Supreme Court Rule 8 or 9. A certification under (c) instead lets the superior court declare that an order resolving fewer than all the claims or parties in a case counts as a final decision on the merits, but only if the court meets all four requirements the rule lists.
Can I immediately appeal if my motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied?
Yes. Denial of a timely motion to dismiss challenging personal jurisdiction, sufficiency of process, or sufficiency of service can be appealed under Supreme Court Rule 7. Under Rule 9(e), not seeking that review within 30 days waives the challenge, though the ruling can still be raised in an appeal from the final judgment if the Supreme Court declines to accept the interlocutory appeal.
Does bifurcating a case automatically make part of it appealable?
No. An order bifurcating or otherwise severing a civil action doesn't by itself result in any order being treated as an appealable final decision, unless the court satisfies all of Rule 46(c)(1)'s requirements: referring to the rule, identifying the order, stating reasons, and finding no just reason for delay.
When exactly does "final judgment" get entered after a verdict?
On the 31st day from the date on the court's written notice of the verdict, decree, or nonsuit or directed-verdict grant, if no timely motion was filed after it, or on the 31st day from the date on the court's written notice of its ruling on a timely post-verdict motion.
Where do I ask for more time to file an appeal document?
Not with the superior court. Requests for extensions of time or for late entry of an appeal document in the Supreme Court must be filed with the Supreme Court itself, under its Rule 21(6).
Source & verification. Rule text, official Comments, and amendment
history are reproduced verbatim from the New Hampshire Superior Court Civil Rules, adopted
by the New Hampshire Supreme Court. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: interlocutory appeal NH superior courtfinal judgment 31 days ruleRule 46(c) certification of final judgmentappeal denial of personal jurisdiction motiontransfer to supreme court