Cited by

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (appealing party must first raise issue in trial court).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (burden on appealing party to provide this court with record sufficient to decide issues raised on appeal), nor sufficiently developed argument to address these issues, and we decline to do so, see White v. Auger, 171 N.H. 660, 665 (2019) (court will not address arguments that a party has not sufficiently

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (holding that “[i]t is the burden of the appealing party.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (holding that “[i]t is the burden of the appealing party.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also In the Matter of Birmingham & Birmingham, 154 N.H. 51, 56 (2006) (self-represented litigants are bound by the same procedural rules that govern parties represented by counsel).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); Town of Nottingham v. Newman, 147 N.H. 131, 137 (2001) (explaining that the rules of appellate practice are not relaxed for self-represented litigants).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (holding that it is the burden of the appealing party to provide this court with a record sufficient to decide the issues on appeal).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004), and limit our review to whether the court’s decision is consonant with applicable law, see Buatti v. Prentice, 162 N.H. 228, 229 (2011).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see State v. Sachdev, 171 N.H. 539, 549 (2018) (citing same).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (parties may not have review of matters not raised in trial court), the husband acknowledges that, by the time he moved for reconsideration, the hearing judge had been nominated to the Superior Court.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004) (noting that appellants bear the burden to demonstrate that they raised their issues in the trial court).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004), are inadequately developed, see State v. Blackmer, 149 N.H. 47, 49 (2003), or are not relevant to the issues on appeal.

Bean v. Red Oak Property Mgmt., Inc., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also In the Matter of Birmingham & Birmingham, 154 N.H. 51, 56 (2006) (self-represented litigants are bound by the same procedural rules that govern parties represented by counsel).

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also In the Matter of Silva & Silva, 171 N.H. 1, 12 (2018) (applying Bean to failure to provide relevant motion or trial court order as part of record on appeal); Estate of Day v. Hanover Ins.

However, “[i]t is a long- standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters not raised in the forum of trial.” Bean v. Red Oak Prop.

Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250-51 (2004), inadequately developed, see State v. Blackmer, 149 N.H. 47, 49 (2003), and warrant no further discussion, see Vogel v. Vogel, 137 N.H. 321, 322 (1993).