Legal Opinion · Dissent

Appeal of Zimmerman

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 31, 1997No. 95-420Published

1DissentHorton, J.

I would hold that the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission (PUC) was correct in asserting jurisdiction over Mr. Zimmerman and well within its discretion to issue the limited regulatory orders in this case. The issue in this case is one of statutory interpretation. Allied N.H. Gas Co. v. Tri-State Gas Co., 107 N.H. 306, 307, 221 A.2d 251, 253 (1966). The interpretive context involves a statute, RSA 362:2 (1995), delegating broad regulatory powers. Id. at 308, 221 A.2d at 253. These regulatory powers necessarily are “circumscribed by the purposes which the statute seeks to accomplish.” Id.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Appeal of Public Service Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1996
  2. Allied New Hampshire Gas Co. v. Tri-State Gas & Supply Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1966
  3. Dover, Somersworth & Rochester Street Railway Co. v. WentworthSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1930
  4. Claremont Gas Light Co. v. Monadnock Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API