Cited by

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 267 (2003), whether to allow evidence over a party’s objection that such evidence is not relevant, see id.; RSA 503:7 (2010) (providing that technical rules of evidence do not apply in small claim proceedings, and that the trial judge may admit any evidence the judge finds material and proper); whether to waive stric

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 270 (2003) (holding that, although it was improper for the plaintiffs to ask the jury to “send a clear message” with its verdicts in closing argument, the trial court sustainably exercised its discretion by not giving an immediate curative instruction and instead later instructing the jury that it should not award a

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 268 (2003); see also State v. Boetti, 142 N.H. 255, 259 (1997) (noting the trial court is granted “considerable deference” in instructing the jury).

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 270 (2003); see Jackson, 158 N.H. at 436.

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 268 (2003) (broad discretion afforded the trial court in managing and supervising discovery and ruling on the conduct of the trial); Elevens v. Town of Bow, 146 N.H. 67, 72 (2001) (“[t]he manner and timing of the trial of all or part of the issues in an action is a question of justice and convenience within the discr

Murray v. Developmental Sews, of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 268 (2003).

“[0]n the record before us and given the broad discretion afforded the trial court in managing and supervising discovery and ruling on the conduct of the trial, we find no error.” Murray v. Developmental Servs.

of Sullivan County, 149 N.H. 264, 267-68 (2003); Rix, 136 N.H. at 553.