Mary E. Feeney v. Karyn M. Kelley
Opinion text
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT
In Case No. 2018-0253, Mary E. Feeney v. Karyn M. Kelley,
the court on January 31, 2019, issued the following order:
To the extent that the plaintiff requests in her memorandum of law that we
sanction the defendant, the request is denied without prejudice to properly
requesting relief in a motion pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23.
Having considered the brief, the memorandum of law, and the record
submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this
case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.
The defendant, Karyn M. Kelly, appeals an order of the Superior Court
(Abramson, J.) denying her motion to vacate a 2015 order authorizing the
plaintiff, Mary E. Feeney, to attach the defendant’s interest in New Hampshire real
estate to secure satisfaction of a domesticated Florida judgment. The defendant
raises numerous issues arising out of the 2015 orders domesticating the Florida
judgment and granting the attachment. We note that those 2015 orders were
final decisions on the merits, see Sup. Ct. R. 3, and that no timely appeal was
taken. To the extent that the defendant is trying to attack those decisions, this
appeal is untimely. See In re Estate of Heald, 147 N.H. 280, 281-82 (2001).
After reviewing the brief, the memorandum of law, and the record on
appeal, we conclude that the defendant’s arguments are, under the
circumstances of this case, without merit, and do not warrant further discussion.
See Vogel v. Vogel, 137 N.H. 321, 322 (1993). To the extent that the defendant
argues that the trial court was biased, we have reviewed the record in this case
and cannot say either that a reasonable person would have questioned Judge
Abramson’s impartiality or that any factors that per se would have disqualified
Judge Abramson were present. See State v. Bader, 148 N.H. 265, 268, 270
(2002). The mere fact that the trial court issued adverse decisions does not
establish the trial court’s bias. See id. at 270-71.
Affirmed.
Lynn, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
concurred.
Eileen Fox,
Clerk
Semantically similar Other opinions on related ground
Ranked by cosine-distance similarity of voyage-law-2 embeddings — these read closest to this opinion's legal subject matter, not just by keyword overlap.
| Docket | Court | Filed | Disposition | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-0733, 2023-0037 | N.H. | 2023-08-22 | — | Mary Feeney v. Karyn Kelley |
| 2017-0166 | N.H. | 2018-01-16 | — | Mary Feeney v. Karyn Kelley |
| 2020-0490 | N.H. | 2021-10-20 | — | Mary Feeney v. Karyn Kelley |
| 2015-0545 | N.H. | 2016-05-02 | — | Branch Banking and Trust Company v. Samson Duclair & a. |
| 2015-0606 | N.H. | 2016-04-29 | — | Shannon O'Keefe v. Jaye Burns |