HJR 4-FN-A - AS INTRODUCED
2016 SESSION
\t16-2101
\t05/09
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION\t4-FN-A
A RESOLUTION\trecognizing the failure of the clerk of the supreme court to process a notice of errors and requiring payment of certain money to Joseph Haas.
SPONSORS:\tRep. Brewster, Merr. 21
COMMITTEE:\tFinance
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANALYSIS
\tThis house joint resolution requires the payment of money to Joseph Haas.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
\t16-2101
\t05/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Sixteen
A RESOLUTION\trecognizing the failure of the clerk of the supreme court to process a notice of errors and requiring payment of certain money to Joseph Haas.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
\tWhereas, in 1992, the New Hampshire supreme court clerk, in case #92-710 (138 NH 389) [March 31, 1994], failed to process a "notice of errors" filed by Joseph Haas; and
\tWhereas, in January 2015, the judicial council determined that the clerk should have processed the notice filed by Mr. Haas; and
\tWhereas, to compensate Mr. Haas for his loss due to the supreme court clerk's nonperformance, Mr. Haas seeks payment of $42,500, plus interest at 10 percent per annum compounded daily, to be paid from the faithful performance bond of the supreme court clerk maintained pursuant to RSA 93-B; now therefore, be it
\tResolved by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
\tThat the general court hereby requires payment of $42,500, plus interest at 10 percent per annum compounded daily, to Joseph Haas. Said sum shall be a charge against the faithful performance bond of the supreme court clerk.
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t16-2101
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t11/20/15
HJR 4-FN-A- FISCAL NOTE
AN ACT\trecognizing the failure of the clerk of the supreme court to process a notice of errors and requiring payment of certain money to Joseph Haas.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Judicial Branch and the Judicial Council state this joint resolution, as introduced, will have no fiscal impact on state, county or local expenditures or revenues.
METHODOLOGY:
The Judicial Branch states the proposed joint resolution seeks payment of $42,500, plus interest at 5% per year to an individual from the performance bond of the Supreme Court Clerk which is maintained pursuant to RSA 93-B:1-a. The Branch indicates the bond is maintained by the Department of Administrative Services. The Department of Administrative Services indicates coverage is up to $200,000, but the coverage is for losses to the State and not to individual citizens. The Branch states for there to have been a loss to the State, the individual would have had to bring suit against the State for the alleged loss. The Branch indicates, since the alleged loss dates back over 20 years, any such suit would be time-barred. As a result the Judicial Branch states this bill would have no fiscal impact.
The Judicial Council assumes it has no financial obligation under this joint resolution.