New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 282-A:67 (2026)
Administrative Reconsideration and Judicial Review
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
282-A:67 Administrative Reconsideration and Judicial Review. –
I. An interested party who is aggrieved by the decision of the appellate board or the commissioner, may within 20 days of the date of mailing of the board's decision request that the board reconsider its decision or that the board order a new hearing specifying in the request the grounds therefor. The appellate board shall within 30 days deny or grant the motion for reconsideration or order a new hearing.
II. An interested party who has exhausted all administrative remedies within the department and who is aggrieved by a final decision of the appeal tribunal as reversed, modified, or affirmed by the appellate board after a motion for reconsideration is granted or denied or after the decision on rehearing, may appeal that decision to the supreme court, but only if the notice of that appeal is filed with the court within 30 days after the date of mailing of the decision from which the appeal is taken and the notice of appeal is served upon the commissioner and the attorney general contemporaneously with the filing of that notice of appeal with the court. In addition, that notice of appeal shall be served upon all parties of record. The service required by this section may be in person or by certified mail, return receipt requested. The appeal shall be styled "appeal of name of the party filing the appeal regarding unemployment compensation". Any interested party, and the state, shall have a right to participate as a party in the appellate proceedings before the court. The notice of appeal shall specifically identify each error for which review is sought. The filing of a notice of appeal shall not stay enforcement of the appeal tribunal decision.
III. Within 60 days after the service of the notice of appeal upon the commissioner, or within such further time allowed by the court, the commissioner shall transmit to the court a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding. By stipulation of all parties to the review proceeding, the record may be shortened. If the record is shortened by stipulation, the court may subsequently require additional portions of the record certified.
IV. The review of the court shall be confined to the record. No evidence shall be received in the court. The court may require oral argument or written briefs, or both.
V. The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the appeal tribunal as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court shall reverse or modify the decision of the appeal tribunal, or remand the case for further proceedings, as determined by the court, only if the substantial rights of the appellant had been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, or conclusions are:
(a) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;
(b) In excess of statutory authority;
(c) Made upon unlawful procedures;
(d) Clearly erroneous in view of the substantial evidence on the whole record; or
(e) Affected by other error of law.
Otherwise, the court shall affirm the appeal tribunal's decision.
VI. For the purposes of this section the commissioner shall be an interested party.
I. An interested party who is aggrieved by the decision of the appellate board or the commissioner, may within 20 days of the date of mailing of the board's decision request that the board reconsider its decision or that the board order a new hearing specifying in the request the grounds therefor. The appellate board shall within 30 days deny or grant the motion for reconsideration or order a new hearing.
II. An interested party who has exhausted all administrative remedies within the department and who is aggrieved by a final decision of the appeal tribunal as reversed, modified, or affirmed by the appellate board after a motion for reconsideration is granted or denied or after the decision on rehearing, may appeal that decision to the supreme court, but only if the notice of that appeal is filed with the court within 30 days after the date of mailing of the decision from which the appeal is taken and the notice of appeal is served upon the commissioner and the attorney general contemporaneously with the filing of that notice of appeal with the court. In addition, that notice of appeal shall be served upon all parties of record. The service required by this section may be in person or by certified mail, return receipt requested. The appeal shall be styled "appeal of name of the party filing the appeal regarding unemployment compensation". Any interested party, and the state, shall have a right to participate as a party in the appellate proceedings before the court. The notice of appeal shall specifically identify each error for which review is sought. The filing of a notice of appeal shall not stay enforcement of the appeal tribunal decision.
III. Within 60 days after the service of the notice of appeal upon the commissioner, or within such further time allowed by the court, the commissioner shall transmit to the court a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding. By stipulation of all parties to the review proceeding, the record may be shortened. If the record is shortened by stipulation, the court may subsequently require additional portions of the record certified.
IV. The review of the court shall be confined to the record. No evidence shall be received in the court. The court may require oral argument or written briefs, or both.
V. The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the appeal tribunal as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court shall reverse or modify the decision of the appeal tribunal, or remand the case for further proceedings, as determined by the court, only if the substantial rights of the appellant had been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, or conclusions are:
(a) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;
(b) In excess of statutory authority;
(c) Made upon unlawful procedures;
(d) Clearly erroneous in view of the substantial evidence on the whole record; or
(e) Affected by other error of law.
Otherwise, the court shall affirm the appeal tribunal's decision.
VI. For the purposes of this section the commissioner shall be an interested party.
Source. 1937, 178:1. 1939, 138:13. 1941, 103:21-23. RL 218:5. 1945, 138:11, 12. 1947, 59:14, 15. 1949, 185:7-10; 290:2. 1951, 36:2; 140:8; 142:7, 8. 1953, 209:4. RSA 282:5(G)(1), (2), (3), (4). 1955, 71:1; 141:10, 11. 1957, 118:6. 1961, 88:10-16. 1965, 208:6, 7; 373:2. 1969, 460:8-10. 1971, 156:23; 539:16-19. 1973, 119:1; 589:5, 6. 1981, 408:3; 576:7. 1987, 409:12. 1993, 71:2, eff. April 23, 1993.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Appeal of Annelie Mullen, 149 A.3d 1270 (N.H. 2016).
Appeal of Annelie Mullen, 149 A.3d 1270 (N.H. 2016). “; see RSA 282-A:67, II (2010). Thus, we dismissed the petitioner’s appeal.”
Appeal of Manchester Transit Auth., 773 A.2d 640 (N.H. 2001). “Judicial review of department of employment security decisions is provided for in RSA 282-A:67 (1999), which specifies the procedure for appealing “a final decision of the appeal tribunal as reversed, modified, or affirmed by the appellate board.”
Appeal of Bosselait, 547 A.2d 682 (N.H. 1988). “Two formerly part-time employees bring this appeal under RSA 282-A:67, I, from an order of an appeal tribunal of the department of employment security (DES), which denied them unemployment compensation because they were not “ready, willing and able” to accept and perform…”
In re Lakeview Neurorehabilitation Ctr., Inc., 834 A.2d 374 (N.H. 2003). “See RSA282-A:67, II (1999). Lakeview asks this court to overturn the award of unemployment benefits to the claimant on the grounds that the tribunal: (1) misapplied or ignored the proper legal standard for assessing employee misconduct under RSA 282-A:32, 1(b); (2) failed to…”
Appeal of New Hampshire Sweepstakes Comm'n, 547 A.2d 241 (N.H. 1988). “The New Hampshire Sweepstakes Commission, pursuant to RSA 282-A:67, appeals a ruling by the Appellate Division of the New Hampshire Department of Employment Security (division) reversing an appeal tribunal’s denial of unemployment benefits to Mary E.”
Appeal of Kelly, 529 A.2d 935 (N.H. 1987). “The claimant also asserts that the findings of the appeal tribunal were not “[c]learly erroneous in view of the substantial evidence on the whole record,” RSA 282-A:67, IV(d) (Supp. 1986), and therefore that this court should not reverse the appeal tribunal’s finding of no…”
Appeal of Kaplan, 893 A.2d 669 (N.H. 2006). “See RSA 282-A:67, II (1999). On appeal, Kaplan argues that: (1) the tribunal’s decision to deny him unemployment was clearly erroneous because he “did not control the corporation”; (2) RSA 282-A:32, 1(e) and its accompanying regulations violate the Equal Protection Clause of…”
Appeal of Work-a-Day of Nashua, Inc., 564 A.2d 445 (N.H. 1989). “From the evidence presented at that hearing, the DES concluded that for purposes of RSA 282-A:9, the workers are employed at Work-a-Day and that Work-a-Day is required to prepare, file, and pay amended tax reports.”
Appeal of Niadni, Inc. d/b/a Indian Head Resort Motel, 93 A.3d 728 (N.H. 2014). “at 662 ; see RSA 282-A:67, II (2010). We may reverse or modify the tribunal’s decision only in limited circumstances.”
Appeal of First Student, Inc., 904 A.2d 645 (N.H. 2006). “II Judicial review of DES decisions is controlled by RSA 282-A:67, II (1999), which specifies the procedure for appealing “a final decision of the appeal tribunal as reversed, modified, or affirmed by the appellate board.”
Appeal of Aspen Contracting NE, LLC, 53 A.3d 571 (N.H. 2012). “Judicial review of DES decisions is controlled by RSA 282-A:67, II (2010), which specifies the procedure for appealing “a final decision of the *90 [AJppeal [TJribunal as reversed, modified, or affirmed by the [AJppellate [B]oard.”
Appeal of Gallant, 485 A.2d 1034 (N.H. 1984). “In addressing the department’s objection to the appeal to this court, we must examine the statutory framework for appeals.”
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.