Legal Opinion · Dissent

Devere v. Attorney General

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided September 20, 2001No. 98-204Published

1DissentLynn, J.

I believe the majority has construed the protec*770tive purposes of the New Hampshire Driver Privacy Act (DPA), RSA 260:14 (Supp. 2000), more broadly than the General Court intended, and that this error has led the majority to impose a judicial gloss on section III of the DPA that is at odds with both the plain language of the statute and its legislative history.

I

RSA 260:14, III states:

Motor vehicle records may be made available in response to a request from a state, a political subdivision of a state, pursuant to a court order, the federal government, or a law enforcement agency for use in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Reno v. CondonSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Metzger v. Town of BrentwoodSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
  3. Robbins v. Kalwall Corp.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
  4. Scheffel v. KruegerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API