Cited by

“We will uphold a trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 607 (2009) (quotation omitted).

liquidation of the husband’s retirement account “was to the detriment of the marital estate” and that it found the reduction from $50,000 to $25,000 to be “fair and equitable and consistent with all of the relevant factors set forth in RSA 458:16-a.” “We will uphold a trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 607 (2009) (quotation omitted).

Similarly, in Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602 (2009), we upheld the trial court’s finding of abuse, notwithstanding the fact that the parties continued to stay together on weekends following the defendant’s threats to the plaintiff’s life.

was what [the defendant] might end up with” and that he told the defendant: “If you take the 20, I can save you maybe 15 years.” The trial court rejected the defendant’s testimony and found that, after “looking at the combined sentences and the egregious nature of the case,” defendant’s trial counsel advised him that “he could be in prison for the rest of his life.” See Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009) (recognizing that on appeal, considerable weight is given to trial court’s judgment

We review the trial court’s statutory interpretation de novo.

Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009); see Boyle v. City of Portsmouth, 172 N.H. 781, 789 (2020).

We will uphold the trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.

We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the father.

We review sufficiency of the evidence claims as a matter of law and uphold the findings and rulings of the trial court unless they are lacking in evidentiary support or tainted by error of law.

To show that the trial court’s decision is not sustainable, the respondent must demonstrate that the court’s ruling was clearly untenable or unreasonable to the prejudice of his case.

Although incidents that are “too distant in time and non-specific” cannot support a finding of abuse, see Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009) (quotation omitted), the evidence was relevant to show that the defendant previously placed the plaintiff in fear by appearing close to her place of employment.

Although incidents that are “too distant in time and non-specific” cannot support a finding of abuse, see Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009) (quotation omitted), the court’s finding of abuse was based upon the sexual assaults, the latest of which occurred as recently as two weeks before the hearing, not the earlier domestic violence incident.

We review sufficiency of the evidence claims as a matter of law and uphold the findings and rulings of the trial court unless they are lacking in evidentiary support or tainted by error of law.

“We will uphold a trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 607 (2009) (quotation omitted).

We will uphold the trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.

Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 607 (2009); Nassar, 156 N.H. at 772.

We review the trial court’s decision for an unsustainable exercise of discretion.

“We will uphold a trial court’s decision on a motion for reconsideration absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 607 (2009) (quotation omitted).

“We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the [petitioner].” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009) (quotation omitted).

We review sufficiency of the evidence claims as a matter of law, upholding the trial court’s findings and rulings unless they lack evidentiary support or are tainted by legal error.

We review such claims as a matter of law and uphold the findings and rulings of the trial court unless they are lacking in evidentiary support or tainted by error of law.

We review sufficiency of the evidence claims as a matter of law and uphold the findings and rulings of the trial court unless they are lacking in evidentiary support or tainted by error of law.

Given that evidence, the trial court could properly conclude that the plaintiff had “show[n] more than a generalized fear for personal safety based upon past physical *24 violence and more recent non-violent harassment.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 608 (2009) (quotation omitted).

The purpose of RSA chapter 173-B “is to preserve and protect the safety of the family unit for all family members by entitling victims of domestic violence to immediate and effective police protection and judicial relief.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 605 (2009) (quotation, citation, and ellipsis omitted).

Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 605 (2009) (quotation omitted).

The purpose of this chapter “is to preserve and protect the safety of the family unit for all family members by entitling victims of domestic *745 violence to immediate and effective police protection and judicial relief.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 605 (2009) (quotation and ellipsis omitted).

Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 605 (2009) (explaining that the purpose of RSA chapter 173-B “is to preserve and protect the safety of the family unit for all family members by entitling victims of domestic violence to immediate and effective police protection and judicial relief’ (quotations and ellipses omitted)).

The purpose of this chapter “is to preserve and protect the safety of the family unit for all family members by entitling victims of domestic violence to immediate and effective police protection and judicial relief.” Walker v. Walker, 158 N.H. 602, 605 (2009) (quotation and ellipsis omitted).