Cited by

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue was dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address other arguments where a conclusion on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments when holding on one issue was dispositive).

Because our holding on this issue is dispositive, we need not address the parties’ remaining arguments.

Given our ruling on this issue, we need not address the parties’ arguments related to the tribunal’s alternative ground 5 for denying the petitioner’s claim: that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that he suffered a “loss of income and a loss of hours as a result of the pandemic.” See Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue was dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address a party’s other arguments when holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address appellants’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address party’s other argument where holding on one issue was dispositive).

RSA 540:9 (providing that “a tenant may not defeat an eviction for nonpayment by use of this section more than 3 times within a 12- month period”); Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

In light of our decision reinstituting the petitioners’ abatement appeals, we need not address, at this time, whether the BTLA may lawfully promulgate a rule permitting the dismissals of property tax abatement appeals on the sole basis that the taxpayer’s attorney signed and certified the abatement application at issue.

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where decision on one issue is dispositive).

In light of our decision, we need not address the wife’s remaining arguments.

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue was dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address appellant’s remaining arguments when holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

Antosz v. Allain, 163 N.H. 298, 302 (2012) (declining to address parties’ other arguments where holding on one issue is dispositive).

We review the trial court’s application of the law to the facts de novo.

We will affirm the grant of summary judgment only if our review of that evidence discloses no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

In reviewing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, we consider the affidavits and other evidence, and all inferences properly drawn from them, in the light most favorable to the non- moving party.