Cited by

Thompson v. D’Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 22 (2011); 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).

It is the father’s burden, as the appealing party, to demonstrate that he specifically raised the arguments articulated in his brief before the trial court.

The burden to demonstrate that an argument was preserved generally falls upon the appealing party, here the tenant.

It is the tenant’s burden, as the appealing party, to demonstrate that he specifically raised the arguments articulated in his brief before the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that, generally, parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that, generally, parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

Thompson v. D’Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 22 (2011) (parties may not have judicial review of matters not raised in the trial court); see also Dist.

Thompson v. D’Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 22 (2011); 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).

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

Thompson v. D’Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 22 (2011) (“[I]t is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters not raised in the forum of trial.”).

It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters that were not properly raised in the trial court.

tact was not unprivileged because the self-defense statute, RSA 627:4 (2007), allows a person to use “non-deadly force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, non-deadly force.” See RSA 627:4, I. It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters not raised in the trial court.

Compare Thompson v. D’Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 23 (2011) (finding no error in the trial court’s reliance upon, among other acts, an attempted assault that occurred within six months of the filing of the petition), with Fillmore v. Fillmore, 147 N.H. 283, 284-86 (2001) (holding that two incidents of physical abuse occurring eight and eleven years prior to the peti

“[P]arties [generally] may not have judicial review of matters not raised in the forum of trial.” Thompson v. D'Errico, 163 N.H. 20, 22 (2011).