Chris Chase v. Nancy Blais & a.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2019-0601, Chris Chase v. Nancy Blais & a., the
court on April 3, 2020, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief, the memoranda 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 plaintiff, Chris Chase, appeals orders of the Superior Court (Houran,
J.) in his action against the defendants, Nancy Blais (GAL) and Deb Fredette
(therapist). He contends that the trial court erred by: (1) dismissing his
consumer protection act claim, RSA ch. 358-A (2009 & Supp. 2019), against
the therapist; (2) setting aside a default judgment that had been previously
entered against the GAL for alleged discovery violations; (3) granting summary
judgment to the therapist and the GAL; (4) not enforcing its discovery order;
and (5) not sanctioning the GAL and her attorney.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk