New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275:53 (2026)

Employees' Remedies

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    275:53 Employees' Remedies. –
I. Action by an employee to recover unpaid wages and/or liquidated damages may be maintained in any court of competent jurisdiction by any one or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves, or such employee or employees may designate an agent or representative to maintain such action.
II. Whenever the commissioner determines that wages have not been paid, and that such unpaid wages constitute an enforceable claim, the commissioner may upon the request of the employee take an assignment in trust for such wages and/or any claim for liquidated damages, without being bound by any of the technical rules respecting the validity of any such assignments and may bring any legal action necessary to collect such claim. With the consent of the assigning employee at the time of the assignment the commissioner shall have the power to settle and adjust any such claim to the same extent as might the assigning employee.
III. The court in any action brought under this subsection may, in addition to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff or plaintiffs, allow costs of the action, and reasonable attorney's fees, to be paid by the defendant. Such attorney's fees in the case of actions brought under this subsection by the commissioner shall be remitted by the commissioner to the state treasurer. The commissioner shall not be required to pay the filing fee or other costs or fees of any nature or to file bond or other security of any nature in connection with such action or proceedings supplementary thereto, or as a condition precedent to the availability to the commissioner of any process in aid of such action or proceedings. The commissioner shall have power to join various claimants in one preferred claim or lien, and in case of suit to join them in one cause of action.

Source. 1963, 237:4. 1975, 355:7, eff. Aug. 6, 1975.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case: Gilman v. Cnty. of Cheshire, 493 A.2d 485 (N.H. 1985).
Gilman v. Cnty. of Cheshire, 493 A.2d 485 (N.H. 1985). · cites it 6× “The defendant next argues that the superior court erred in granting attorney’s fees to the plaintiff under RSA 275:53, III. The defendant argues that because this action was not brought pursuant to RSA 275:53, the plaintiff is not entitled to attorney’s fees under that provision…”
Ichiban Japanese Steakhouse, Inc. v. Samantha Greaney, 167 N.H. 138 (N.H. 2014). · cites it 7× “As $8,390 is less than 60% of the total tips Greaney earned, we conclude that the employer has failed to demonstrate that the DOL erred, as a matter of law, when it awarded $8,390 in lost wages to Greaney.”
In re Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., 273 F.R.D. 424 (N.D. Ind. 2008). · cites it 3× “N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275:53 provides that actions asserting claims such as the New Hampshire plaintiffs’ statutory claims may only be brought “by any one or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves, or such employee or employees may designate an agent or…”
Garcia v. E.J. Amusements of New Hampshire, Inc., 98 F. Supp. 3d 277 (D. Mass. 2015). · cites it 2× “Labor Ready holds that a Department of Labor commissioner may not pursue a wage adjustment claim under N.H.Rev.Stat. § 275:53 without express assignment from an employee.”
Galloway v. Chicago-Soft, Ltd., 713 A.2d 982 (N.H. 1998). · cites it 3× “Rather, Chicago-Soft asserts that only under a direct superior court action, see RSA 275:53, I, III (1987), can fees be awarded.”
Scacchi v. Dycom Indus., Inc., 297 F. Supp. 2d 406 (D.N.H. 2004). · cites it 8× “Alternatively, employees may bring an action to recover unpaid wages in any court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to RSA 275:53. Labor Ready Northeast, Inc. v.”
In re Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., Emp. Practices Litig., 283 F.R.D. 427 (N.D. Ind. 2012). · cites it 3× “N.H.Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275:53 provides that actions asserting claims such as the New Hampshire plaintiffs’ statutory claims may only be brought “by any one or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves, or such employee or employees may designate an agent or…”
Labor Ready Ne., Inc. v. New Hampshire Dep't of Labor, 798 A.2d 48 (N.H. 2002). · cites it 3× “” RSA 275:53 (1999) affords an employee the option of pursuing a wage claim “in any court of competent jurisdiction,” RSA 275:53,1, or assigning his or her rights to the commissioner “to settle and adjust any such claim,” RSA 275:53, II.”
Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. v. Gary Joseph Khoury, 177 A.3d 724 (N.H. 2017). · cites it 6× “In addition, the trial court awarded Khoury attorney’s fees and statutory interest pursuant to RSA 275:53 (2010) and RSA 524:1-b (2007), respectively.”
Caswell v. BCI Geonetics, Inc., 437 A.2d 321 (N.H. 1981). · cites it 3× “When he left the defendant’s employ, he filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire seeking unpaid wages and expenses under RSA 275:53 I. The defendant moved for partial summary judgment on the ground that RSA ch.”
Demers Agency v. Widney, 927 A.2d 1226 (N.H. 2007). “2006) rather than a direct action in the superior court under RSA 275:53 (1999); (2) an award of attorney’s fees is inequitable because the law was unsettled and because Demers acted in good faith by following an established and well-known company policy when he refused to pay…”
Rix v. Kinderworks Corp., 618 A.2d 833 (N.H. 1992). “In support of this argument, it asserts that since the statute does not define the term “personnel file,” employers lack proper notice as to what constitutes a “personnel file.”
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275:53(1): 1 case
Garcia v. E.J. Amusements of New Hampshire, Inc., 98 F. Supp. 3d 277 (D. Mass. 2015). “Labor Ready holds that a Department of Labor commissioner may not pursue a wage adjustment claim under N.H.Rev.Stat. § 275:53 without express assignment from an employee.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.