Legal Opinion · Dissent

Appeal of Malouin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 13, 2007No. 2006-394Published

1DissentGalway, J.

“We are the final arbiter of the meaning of the workers’ compensation statute, and the nature and extent of compensation to the injured employee is governed by the express statutory language and that which can be fairly implied therefrom.” Appeal of Woodmansee, 150 N.H. 63, 67 (2003) (emphasis added). In construing a statute, we ascribe the plain and ordinary meaning to words used, considering the statute as a whole and interpreting it consistent with its purpose. Appeal of Denton, 147 N.H. 259, 260 (2001). Any reasonable doubt in construing a workers’ compensation statute is resolved in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Appeal of Town of Hampton FallsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
  2. Appeal of DentonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001
  3. In re WoodmanseeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2003
  4. Appeal of Hypertherm, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2005
  5. Appeal of Kraft Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API