Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Hutchins v. Peabody, 151 N.H. 82 (2004)

Citation
Hutchins v. Peabody, 151 N.H. 82 (2004)
Parent Document
Hutchins v. Peabody, 151 N.H. 82 (2004)
Jurisdiction
New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date
2004-05-25

Full Text

739 chars
The question presented is one of statutory interpretation. This court is the final arbiter of the intent of the legislature as expressed in the words of a statute considered as a whole. Remington Invs. v. Howard, 150 N.H. 653, 654 (2004). In interpreting a statute, we first look to the language of the statute itself, and, if possible, construe that language according to its plain and ordinary meaning. Id. Where the language of a statute is clear on its face, its meaning is not subject to modification. Id. We will neither consider what the legislature might have said nor add words that it did not see fit to include. Id. We-review the trial court’s interpretation of a statute de novo. Id. In pertinent part, RSA 540:13-d, I, states: