Robin Carbone v. Stephen DePaula

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2015-0164, Robin Carbone v. Stephen DePaula,
the court on October 9, 2015, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief and record submitted on appeal, we conclude
that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.

The plaintiff, Robin Carbone, appeals an order of the Circuit Court (Spath,
J.), in favor of the defendant, Stephen DePaula, on her stalking petition. See RSA
633:3-a (Supp. 2014). She contends that the trial court erred as a matter of law
when it found that that the defendant’s behavior would not have placed a
reasonable person in fear for her personal safety.

As the appealing party, the plaintiff 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 well-reasoned order, the plaintiff’s challenges to it, the
relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the plaintiff
has not demonstrated reversible error. See id.

We emphasize that this order affirming the denial of the stalking petition is
without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to seek an equitable restraining order.
See, e.g., State v. Simone, 151 N.H. 328, 331 (2004). We note that violation of an
equitable restraining order would subject the defendant to the court’s contempt
powers, including the power to incarcerate him. See In the Matter of Kosek &
Kosek, 151 N.H. 722, 727 (2005).

Affirmed.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.

Eileen Fox,
Clerk