Cited by

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 502 (2007); see Kelleher, 152 N.H. at 848 (adopting these factors from New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. at 750-51).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 501 (2007) (noting that one goal of the child support guidelines is “to ensure that both the custodial and non-custodial parents share in the support responsibility for their children, according to the relative percentage of each parent’s income” (emphasis added)).2 Moreover, this result furthers the other statutory

RSA 458-C:5, I. Although this list is non-exclusive, we have interpreted “special circumstances” as including only circumstances that are “economic in nature and relate to the impact of a parent’s financial condition upon his or her ability to meet a child’s needs.” In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 504 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 506 (2007) (declining to address issue without clear finding by trial court and remanding for clarification).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 502-03 (2007) (holding that father failed to establish that any unfairness resulted from mother’s allegedly inconsistent positions in seeking to modify child support pursuant to statutory right); cf. Kelleher v. Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co., 152 N.H. 813, 849 (2005) (holding that defendant would derive an unfair advanta

“New Hampshire’s child support guidelines are codified in RSA chapter 458-C, and establish a uniform system to determine the amount of child support awards.” In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 501 (2007) (quotation omitted).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503-04 (2007).

We have previously observed that the “purpose of child support is to provide economic support for the children, not the obligee parent.” In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503-04 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 504 (2007) (concluding that “special circumstances” not enumerated by the statute are economic in nature).

The guidelines “establish a uniform system to determine the amount of child support awards.” In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 501 (2007) (quotation omitted).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 502 (2007).

We conclude that, viewed within the context of the overall statutory scheme, see In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 504 (2007), the term “traffic control device” encompasses speed limit signs, and that the legislature intended to create a legal presumption that any properly positioned, legible speed limit sign is valid.

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503-04 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503-04 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 503-04 (2007).

In the Matter of Carr & Edmunds, 156 N.H. 498, 504 (2007) (citations omitted).