Court Opinion

ID: 9897503
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-14 19:15:23.810311+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:40.182082
License: Public Domain

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                             SUPREME COURT

     In Case No. 2023-0276, Shirley Donahue v. Ronald Vieira,
the court on October 19, 2023, issued the following order:

       The court has reviewed the written arguments and the record submitted
on appeal, and has determined to resolve the case by way of this order. See
Sup. Ct. R. 20(2). The defendant, Ronald Vieira, appeals a judgment in the
amount of $2,663 plus costs entered by the Circuit Court (Murray, J.),
following a hearing, in favor of the plaintiff, Shirley Donahue, on her small
claim for damages caused by the defendant’s improper installation of a dish
washer. We construe the defendant’s brief to be challenging the sufficiency of
the evidence to support the judgment, both in terms of his liability for, and the
amount of, the damages awarded. We affirm.

        We will uphold the trial court’s findings and conclusions unless they lack
evidentiary support or are tainted by error of law. Syncom Indus. v. Wood, 155
N.H. 73, 82 (2007). The question is not whether we would have found
differently, but rather, whether a reasonable person could have found as the
trial judge did based upon the same evidence. See Barrows v. Boles, 141 N.H.
382, 396 (1996). It is the burden of the appealing party, here the defendant, to
provide a record that is sufficient to address the issues he raises. Bean v. Red
Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004). Absent a transcript, we assume
that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s findings, and review
its decision for errors of law only. See id.; Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396,
396-97 (1997). In this case, the defendant has not provided a trial transcript.
Under these circumstances, we assume that the evidence supports the trial
court’s findings, and, discerning no error of law on the face of the trial court’s
narrative order, we uphold its decision.

                                                  Affirmed.

     MacDonald, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
concurred.

                                                  Timothy A. Gudas,
                                                       Clerk