Creative Transportation Service v. Paul E. Vrusho d/b/a Granite State Nursery & Evergreen
Creative Transportation Service v. Paul E. Vrusho d/b/a Granite State Nursery & Evergreen, No. 2014-0369 (N.H. Mar. 13, 2015).
The holding in the court’s own words
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2014-0369, Creative Transportation Service v. Paul E. Vrusho d/b/a Granite State Nursery & Evergreen, the court on March 13, 2015, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs and record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. Based upon our review of the trial court’s order, the defendant’s challenges to it, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the defendant has not demonstrated reversible error.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Ralph P. Gallo & a. v. Susan Traina & a. 166 N.H. 737
Opinion text
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT
In Case No. 2014-0369, Creative Transportation Service v.
Paul E. Vrusho d/b/a Granite State Nursery & Evergreen, the
court on March 13, 2015, issued the following order:
Having considered the briefs and record submitted on appeal, we conclude
that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.
The defendant, Paul E. Vrusho doing business as Granite State Nursery &
Evergreen, appeals an order of the Superior Court (McHugh, J.), dated March 26,
2014, granting a motion by the plaintiff, Creative Transportation Service, Inc., to
award attorney’s fees of $24,510.00 and costs of $1,370.00. We note that the
trial court granted, in part, the defendant’s motion for reconsideration, stating:
“From the Court’s award of attorney fees in the sum of $24,510.00, any amount
charged for the Supreme Court appeal must be subtracted.” We note further
that, although the trial court did not specifically articulate the amount to be
“subtracted” from the award, the plaintiff conceded, and the record establishes,
that its attorney charged $12,931.00 in connection with the defendant’s appeal
to this court. Accordingly, we construe the trial court’s order as having awarded
the plaintiff $11,579.00 in attorney’s fees and $1,370.00 in costs.
We construe the defendant’s brief to argue that the trial court erred by
awarding the plaintiff attorney’s fees because: (1) the August 1, 2013 trial court
order finding that the plaintiff “had a judgment with a present value of $55,298
plus costs and fees” did not “award requested legal costs separately but added up
whatever the attorney had stated were the costs and fees and awarded the
$36,000 default judgment from [North Carolina] plus what the attorney cited as
costs and fees”; (2) the plaintiff failed to file a motion to reconsider the August 1
order; (3) the award included fees associated with an appeal to us and to the
Massachusetts federal district court, although he does not specifically identify
those fees; (4) the Massachusetts federal district court declined to impose
monetary sanctions; and (5) the underlying decision on the merits was
erroneous. The defendant also requests that we “award him costs for having to
defend himself in a frivolous suit for contempt.” However, the record shows that
the plaintiff withdrew the motion for contempt one day after it was filed.
As the appealing party, the defendant has the burden of demonstrating
reversible error. Gallo v. Traina, 166 N.H. 737, 740 (2014). Based upon our
review of the trial court’s order, the defendant’s challenges to it, the relevant law,
and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the defendant has not
demonstrated reversible error. See id.
Affirmed.
Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
Eileen Fox,
Clerk
2