Petition of Paul Lussier (New Hampshire Retirement System)

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire reviewed Paul Lussier’s challenge to a New Hampshire Retirement System ruling denying service credit for a four-month disability absence in 1994. The court held that the 1995 amendment extending disability-related service credit to group I and group II members created a substantive right and applied prospectively, so it did not entitle Lussier to credit for his 1994 absence. The court also rejected his inadequately developed due process claim and affirmed the retirement board’s decision.

Holdings

1. RSA 100-A:5 did not entitle Lussier to have the law in effect at his retirement applied retroactively to service that allegedly accrued in 1994. Although creditable service is calculated upon service retirement, the entitlement concerns service that accrued during the member's employment.
2. The 1995 amendment did not apply retroactively to Lussier's 1994 disability absence because it created a new substantive right and contained no provision requiring retrospective application.
3. The due process claim did not warrant extended judicial consideration because it was inadequately developed and unsupported by citation to either the State or Federal Constitution. In addition, RSA 100-A:27 authorized the board to correct errors in its records and adjust payments accordingly.

Questions Presented

1. Whether RSA 100-A:5 required the law in effect when Lussier retired to govern the calculation of creditable service.
2. Whether the 1995 amendment to RSA 100-A:4, III-a, which expanded disability-related service credit to group I and group II members, applied retroactively to Lussier's 1994 absence.
3. Whether the NHRS violated due process by correcting credit for all four months of the disability period when Lussier had initially requested credit for only November 1994.

Disposition

affirmed