Legal Opinion
Young v. Prevue Products, Inc.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided November 9, 1987No. 86-265PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrock, C.J.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the portion of RSA 281:12 which bars consortium actions against an employer by the spouse of an employee injured on the job is unconstitutional under the due process provisions of the New Hampshire Constitution, N.H. Const, pt. I, art. 14, because it eliminates a cause of action previously available to spouses of injured employees without providing an adequate quid pro quo. We uphold the constitutionality of this statutory provision and affirm.
*85The plaintiff’s husband, Daniel Young, was injured during the course of his employment with Prevue Products, Inc.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- LaBonte v. National Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1970
- Archie v. HamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972
- Heinz v. Concord Union School DistrictSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
- Park v. Rockwell International Corp.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1981
- Estabrook v. American Hoist & Derrick, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Thompson v. ForestSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1992
- Alonzi v. Northeast Generation Services Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
- Rounds v. Standex InternationalSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1988
- Gilbert v. Essex Group, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1993
- In re of AbbottSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.