Legal Opinion · Dissent

Samaha v. Grafton County

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 28, 1985No. 84-121Published

1DissentBatchelder, J.

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because the plaintiff in my view was legally an employee of Grafton County and was entitled to the benefits of the county’s participation in the New Hampshire Retirement System (NHRS).

An “employee” under NHRS is “any regular classified or unclassified officer or employee of an employer . . . .” RSA 100:1, IV (1964) *588(emphasis added). It is undisputed that Grafton County was an employer under the statute. See RSA 100:1, III, :29 (1964). To qualify as an employee of the county under the act, the plaintiff thus need establish only that he was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pepin v. BeaulieuSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1959
  2. State Employees' Ass'n of New Hampshire, Inc. v. Belknap CountySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982
  3. Harris v. AdamsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API