Appeal of Bosselait
New Hampshire Supreme Court
547 A.2d 682, 130 N.H. 604 (1988)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
Brothers Albert and Edward Bosselait (plaintiffs), aged 76 and 79, respectively, shared a single full-time janitor’s position at a youth center, each working four hours per day. When the youth center contracted custodial services to a third party, the Bosselaits’ position was eliminated. The Bosselaits applied for unemployment benefits but were rejected. The Bosselaits appealed. At an evidentiary hearing before the appeal tribunal, Albert stated that he had a weak back, whereas Edward stated that he had partial eyesight and angina. The Bosselaits said they were unwilling to accept new full-time jobs due to their advanced age. The tribunal found the Bosselaits ineligible for benefits because they were not ready, willing, and able to accept full-time work, as was statutorily required. The appellate division affirmed. The Bosselaits sought administrative review by the court, arguing that the statutory requirement of being ready, willing, and able to accept full-time work violated the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the act) and the state and federal constitutional guarantees of equal protection of the laws.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Souter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.