Joan Andrews-Bentivegna v. Merri D. Vacca & a.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2018-0705, Joan Andrews-Bentivegna v. Merri
D. Vacca & a., the court on September 16, 2019, 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.

Respondent Kenneth Andrews appeals an order of the Circuit Court (Rappa,
J.), in an action brought by the petitioner, Joan Andrews-Bentivegna, against him
and respondent Merri D. Vacca to partition certain real estate owned jointly by the
three parties. The trial court denied the respondent’s motions for reconsideration,
to stop the order to sell, and to dismiss the petition, and granted the petitioner’s
proposed order giving her authority to sell the property and to place the proceeds
in escrow pending further court order. Andrews contends that: (1) the deed
contains no mechanism for the sale of the property and provides that he retains
the property because he alleges that he is “the last remaining owner”; (2)
mediation was ordered, but did not take place; (3) no “pre-trial” or trial took place;
and (4) “[n]o reason for [the] sale of the property was given.”

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

Affirmed.

Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ., concurred.

Eileen Fox,
Clerk