359-C:8,1(c), :10,1(b), :12, :14. It is apparent from reading the statute in its totality that the reference in section 13 to “action[s] to enforce liability for a violation of... this chapter” is meant to refer to those remedies explicitly authorized by the statute and is not intended to create any additional rights of action. Although we generally presume that the legislature does not use superfluous or redundant words, see Appeal of Derry Educ. Assoc., 138 N.H. 69, 71 (1993), interpreting RSA chapter 359-C to create additional remedies would circumvent the statute’s plain meaning, in light of the express language in section 14-a. Cross further argues that she is entitled to costs and attorney’s fees associated with her suppression motion. See State v. Flynn, 123 N.H. 457, 465 (1983) (<HOLDING>). At oral argument, Cross’ counsel conceded
holding suppression of evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a subsequently invalidated search warrant is not required holding that the fourth amendment remedy sought is suppression holding that because suppression of illegally obtained evidence is a form of injunctive relief suppression of defendants bank records obtained in violation of rsa chapter 359c is an appropriate remedy holding that the appropriate remedy for a public trial violation was a new suppression hearing not a new trial because the remedy should be appropriate to the violation holding that suppression of the evidence or dismissal of an indictment are not required to remedy a violation of  6103