In re Opinion of the Justices

CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court
CitationIn re Opinion of the Justices, 84 N.H. 584, 150 A. 551 (N.H. 1930)
Decision Date06 May 1930
PartiesIn re OPINION OF THE JUSTICES.

Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Court in answer to resolutions of the House of Representatives.

To the House of Representatives:

Your resolutions, adopted at the special session of the Legislature, held in March, 1930, were received after the final adjournment of that session. It is not suggested therein that there is any anticipation of a further session. It therefore follows that any answers to your inquiries could not aid you in the performance of your official duties. Opinion of the Justices, 70 N. H. 640, 50 A. 329.

There are early precedents for returning to the inquirers' successors in office answers to questions propounded under these circumstances. Opinion of the Justices, House Journal 1819, 244; Opinion of the Justices, 7 N. H. 599; Opinion of the Justices, 8 N. H. 573; Opinion of the Justices, 41 N. H. 550. In none of these instances does the matter of the limitations upon the duty to answer appear to have been considered. The limitations involved here were first spoken of when the Legislature enacted that a commission should frame rules and forms for proceedings under the school laws, "which * * * when approved by the supreme court or a majority of the judges thereof, shall be deemed valid and sufficient." Laws 1885, c. 144. In declining to pass upon the report of the commission, it was said: "The seventy-fourth article authorizes each branch of the legislature, as well as the governor and council, to require the advice of the justices of the supreme court upon important legal questions pending in the body entitled to the advice, and awaiting the consideration and action of that body in the course of its legislative or executive duty." In re School-Law Manual, 63 N. H. 574, 576, 4 A. 878, 680.

These limitations have since been observed. The question must be pending and awaiting action in the body propounding the inquiry. This test has been considered and applied in the following Opinion of the Justices, 67 N. H. 600, 43 A. 1074; Id., 70 N. H. 640, 50 A. 329; Id., 73 N. H. 625, 63 A. 505, 6 Ann. Cas. 689; Id., 75 N. H. 613, 72 A. 754; Id., 79 N. H. 535, 112 A. 525.

In the present instance the necessary occasion for advice is lacking. Whether the next House will need and desire advice is to be left to its determination. The present House cannot act for it in this matter.

The advice given last January, after the adjournment of the regular...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
7 cases
  • State v. Lothrops-Farnham Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 6 Mayo 1930
    ... ... Denver v. United Cigar Stores, 68 Colo. 363, 189 P. 848; Lawton v. Stewart Dry Goods Co., 197 Ky. 394, 247 S. W. 14, 26 A. L. R. 686; Opinion of the Justices, 226 Mass. 613, 115 N. E. 978 ...         The language of the court in Adams v. Tanner, 244 U. S. 590, 37 S. Ct. 662, 61 L ... ...
  • Opinion Of The Justices.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 14 Octubre 1949
    ...In re School Law Manual, 63 N.H. 574, 576, 4 A. 878, 880. Numerous opinions of the Court have applied this test. See Opinions of the Justices, 84 N.H. 584, 585, 150 A. 551; Id., 86 N.H. 607, 176 A. 422; Id., 90 N.H. 567, 6 A.2d 763; Id., 93 N.H. 477, 39 A.2d 188. The inquiries now made aris......
  • Opinion Of The Justices.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 10 Mayo 1944
    ...furnish an opinion when the question submitted is not pending and awaiting action in the body propounding the inquiry. Opinion of the Justices, 90 N.H. 567, 6 A.2d 763. It is our conviction, however, that the reasons which require adherence to this rule do not exist in the present instance.......
  • Opinion of the Justices
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 8 Abril 1954
    ...and respectfully ask that we be excused from compliance with your request. In re Opinions of the Justices, 93 N.H. 477, 39 A.2d 188; 90 N.H. 567, 6 A.2d 763; 86 N.H. 607, 176 A. 422; 84 N.H. 584, 150 A. 551, supra, and opinions FRANK R. KENISON LAURENCE I. DUNCAN AMOS N. BLANDIN, Jr. EDWARD......
  • Get Started for Free