Whether the New Hampshire Supreme Court erred in dismissing the petitioner's claims on summary judgment despite findings of fact indicating the state government deliberately refused to provide heat assistance, causing the petitioner to suffer harm

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED The NH stebe Cond System refuse ts heat hay aul claims, Seemingly won pot “poe de facte peticy se wards these Suing the ~stcte. gercennsent, They do this by * w— dismussuy clans on Summary foda ment oth afin dings of fort, Cousing . one te Conchuda thet the gedx Auevren, bothacd te deliberate. r— rePeny Ts Pie othegathen, ond than garg oyTcien . oe dic missing Con pleaats afin prefecture’ Fectend, ethu then the merds ; od ainisteRvg, | ASS Whey Woots vusrthyiw ther discachs, ts igo shou d they chooae, : } Lue. , — Ocecorton cliy © heed werk Member f wthe beach cs, often a consi dercble ae ey, pe duce. on opimnien fuseh 16 emanbelly a plegrovism f dc AG's Maho ~bo Oismucs. Tha elo Leeds sete beliewe they fares behead te JaMberafe), — Sad) decisions invoices ficlide ghey ercers fact, never mrad com pete. Nscegard 4 aro decisis So os te reach He conclusion they unsh. Dsacthe MH. SupreqieGisuat's Lsckteory fefuset.. tof S20 Clara, bee Sant prepay. , before ity d.ortine.ctney, guns disthon 5 epg onl te e Coastetatuen? I