Hynes v. Hale, 146 N.H. 533 (2001)

Citation: Hynes v. Hale, 146 N.H. 533 (2001)
Parent Document: Hynes v. Hale, 146 N.H. 533 (2001)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2001-06-22
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8092344/hynes-v-hale/ ↗

Full Text

1,160 chars

In support of his argument, Hynes relies principally upon Smith Insurance, Inc. v. Grievance Committee, 120 N.H. 856 (1980). In Smith Insurance, Inc., we addressed “the constitutionality of RSA 402:75 (Supp. 1979), establishing [a] Grievance Committee empowered to review the termination by insurance companies of agency agreements between the companies and their agents.” Id. at 857. The Grievance Committee was “solely empowered to hold hearings on private disputes between insurance agents and insurance companies relative to the termination of their contracts and to give some equitable relief in the form of an order requiring the insurance company to rescind its termination of the agency contract.” Id. at 862. Although the Grievance Committee’s decisions could be appealed to the superior court, we ruled that the legislation empowering it to hear agency contract disputes violated the separation of powers doctrine. Id. We observed that “[i]f . . . the duty of an executive board is primarily to decide questions of legal rights between private parties that are unconnected to any regulatory function . . . such function belongs to the judiciary.” Id.

Other Sections in This Document (29)

Full Text