Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite In Re Salesky, 958 A.2d 948.

98 citing documents.

Curtis Leach v. Credit One Bank, N.A. N.H. 2020
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court orders presents a question of law for this court).
State of New Hampshire v. Mohammad Salimullah N.H. 2020
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (“The interpretation of a court order is a question of law, which we review de novo.”).
James Faro & a. v. Land's End Association N.H. 2019
In context, we construe the trial court’s order as having found that the plaintiffs failed to establish willfulness under any of the definitions in Franciosa, including “inexcusable carelessness.” See In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Steven Summers and Christine Summers N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
In the Matter of Gina Bundza and Brian Bundza N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (explaining that the interpretation of a trial court order presents a question of law for this court, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Jessika Greene and Curtis Billups N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of a trial court order presents a question of law for this court).
Edward F. Hayes, Jr., Trustee of the Survivor's Trust A c/u The Hayes Family Trust dated January 20, … N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
In the Matter of Dana Albrecht and Katherine Albrecht N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 707 (2008).
Jason A. Czekalski v. Bruce R. Jasper, Esq. & a. N.H. 2019
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
Nicole Pittore v. Dan LeBlanc & a. N.H. 2018
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
Appeal of FairPoint Logistics, Inc. & a. 195 A.3d 825 N.H. 2018
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (stating that we interpret a court order as a matter of law).
Edward White v. State of New Hampshire 195 A.3d 108 N.H. 2018
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (explaining that we interpret a trial court order de novo).
In the Matter of Tanya Braga-Pillsbury and Mickey Pillsbury N.H. 2018
Geraghty, 169 N.H. at 418 (stating trial court has discretion to consider when and by whom property was acquired in determining its distribution); In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (stating interpretation of trial court order is question of law, which we review de novo).
Robert Nelson v. John Biddle & a. N.H. 2018
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (stating interpretation of trial court order is matter of law, which we review de novo).
In The Matter of Carlos Figueroa and Deanna Figueroa N.H. 2018
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
In the Matter of Emily Sanborn and Timothy E. Sanborn 176 A.3d 763 N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (“The interpretation of a court order is a question of law, which we review de novo.”).
Appeal of Richard Adam N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of board’s decision presents a question of law for this court).
In the Matter of Sandra W. Hair and Sandra L. Hair & a. N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order presents a question of law for this court).
In the Matter of Eva Stilkey and Alexander Marsters N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (The interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo.).
In the Matter of Crystal Ndyaija and Joshua Ndyaija N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
Petition of Wayne Sawyer 167 A.3d 622 N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702, 958 A.2d 948 (2008) (interpretation of a court order presents a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Coleen Walsh and Steven Walsh N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
Harvey J. Garod v. Steiner Law Office, PLLC & a. 161 A.3d 104 N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 709 (2008).
In the Matter of Caren Logan and James Logan N.H. 2017
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (stating that the interpretation of a court order presents a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Amanda Herman and Nathan Adams N.H. 2016
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of George Provencal and Laurie Provencal N.H. 2016
Rather, we construe it to find that the husband does not need to contribute $295 per 2 month to retirement to meet his “reasonable needs.” See RSA 458:19, I; see also In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 703 (2008) (We construe the trial court’s order with reference to the issues it was meant to decide.).
In the Matter of Tina Robinton and Stephen Robinton N.H. 2016
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
Thomas Newman v. New Hampshire State Police Permits and Licensing Unit N.H. 2016
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (stating that the interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of James Hatzos and Lisa Hatzos N.H. 2016
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
In the Matter of Judith Desmarais and Timothy Desmarais N.H. 2016
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698 (2008).
Leah Ducey v. Joan Iannazzo N.H. 2015
Although it also stated that “[s]eptic contamination is an issue of habitability and human safety and should be remediated immediately,” this statement did not conflict with its specific finding of “a violation of the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment.” Cf. In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 703 (2008) (in construing trial court order, we interpret it with reference to issues it was intended to decide and construe its subsidiary clauses so as not to conflict with its primary purpo
Carol Rose v. Jason Purdy N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo).
Mary Feeney v. Karyn Kelley N.H. 2015
der and referred to the petitioner’s argument as a “response,” we interpret the trial court’s order, when read in conjunction with its order upon reconsideration, as placing the initial burden on the petitioner, who argued that she had been a joint tenant of the property for many years and that “neither party contributed to the maintenance of the property.” See In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order is question of law, which we review de
In the Matter of Valentina Conant and William Faller N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
David Bonin & a. v. Joseph Scott & a.; Joseph Scott & a. v. David Bonin & a. N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Gabrielle Muller and William Muller N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (the interpretation of a trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
In the Matter of Philip Wyzik and Lisa Hayward-Wyzik N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
In the Matter of John Tucker, II and Holly Tucker N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
City of Nashua v. Secretary of State N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (interpretation of trial court order is a question of law, which we review de novo).
Paul T. Marino v. Christopher Muro N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
In the Matter of Garrett Lear and Annette Lear N.H. 2015
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
In re Heinrich 55 A.3d 1025 N.H. 2012
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
Elter-Nodvin v. Nodvin 48 A.3d 908 N.H. 2012
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 709 (2008) (“[W]e must assume that the trial court made all findings necessary to support its decision.”).
In Re Dube 44 A.3d 556 N.H. 2012
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
Rabbia v. Rocha 162 N.H. 734 N.H. 2011
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 707 (2008).
Appeal of Langenfeld 993 A.2d 232 N.H. 2010
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 702 (2008).
In Re Stapleton 992 A.2d 593 N.H. 2010
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 708 (2008).
In Re Aube 969 A.2d 338 N.H. 2009
In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157 N.H. 698, 709 (2008).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by