Ramking, Inc. v. Heath Enterprises, Inc.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2019-0451, Ramking, Inc. v. Heath Enterprises,
Inc., the court on April 1, 2020, 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, Ramking, Inc., appeals an order of the Superior Court
(Tucker, J.) dismissing its request to enforce the non-competition provision in
its franchise agreement with the defendant, Heath Enterprises, Inc., because
the trial court found that the defendant’s restaurant does not compete with the
plaintiff “in any material way.” The plaintiff contends that the trial court erred
by: (1) finding that the plaintiff’s June 2014 letter terminating the franchise
did in fact terminate it, although the defendant did not comply with its
obligations upon termination; (2) finding that the defendant was not competing
with the plaintiff when the defendant was operating an allegedly similar
restaurant in the location where it previously had operated the plaintiff’s
franchise; and (3) not finding that the defendant’s actions violated “the spirit”
of the non-competition provision.

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.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk