In the Matter of Tracy Middleton and Jack Middleton, Jr.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2017-0134, In the Matter of Tracy Middleton
and Jack Middleton, Jr., the court on December 8, 2017, 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 petitioner, Tracy Middleton (wife), appeals an order of the Circuit Court
(Foley, J.) distributing the marital estate in her divorce from the respondent, Jack
Middleton, Jr. (husband). She contends that the trial court erred by: (1)
requiring her to pay the expenses on the marital home, in which she was living,
until it is sold; (2) not accounting for the advance to the husband for his
attorney’s fees and costs when she had removed a comparable amount from a
trust for her attorney’s fees; (3) not accounting for the possibility that she might
have to repay funds to a trust, although there was no evidence of such an
obligation; (4) not charging the husband’s property distribution with the debt he
accrued for living expenses during the divorce; (5) not including as a marital
asset the proceeds from the sale of a property that the trial court found the
husband had used to “finish the property, to pay college tuition [for the parties’
child], and to pay living expenses”; and (6) not including as a marital asset an
“operating loss carry forward” that the husband testified he “might” have and for
which the wife did not establish a value.

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

Affirmed.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Lynn, Bassett, and Hantz Marconi, JJ.,
concurred.

Eileen Fox,
Clerk