Karyn Kelley v. Leslie Wood

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2019-0689, Karyn Kelley v. Leslie Wood, the
court on December 3, 2020, 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 plaintiff, Karyn Kelley, appeals the order of the Circuit Court
(Ryan, J.), following a hearing, denying her small claim against the defendant,
Leslie Wood. See RSA ch. 503 (2010 & Supp. 2019). The plaintiff argues that
the trial court erred in finding that she failed to prove that: (1) her dog was
bitten by the defendant’s dog; and (2) she sustained damages. The plaintiff
also argues that the trial court erred in precluding evidence allegedly
admissible under New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 608.

In her complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant’s dog bit the
plaintiff’s dog, causing injuries. Following a hearing, during which the plaintiff,
the defendant, an animal control officer, and a neighbor testified, the trial court
found that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant’s dog bit the plaintiff’s
dog. We construe the court’s order to impliedly find that the plaintiff also failed
to prove that the defendant’s dog injured the plaintiff’s dog in any other
manner during the confrontation. See In the Matter of Salesky & Salesky, 157
N.H. 698, 702 (2008) (we construe trial court’s order with reference to issues it
was intended to decide). The neighbor testified that her fiancé intervened and
separated the dogs before they made contact. The plaintiff argues that the trial
court gave too much weight to the neighbor’s testimony. We will uphold the
trial court’s factual findings if they are supported by the record. Vention Med.
Advanced Components v. Pappas, 171 N.H. 13, 28 (2018). We defer to a trial
court’s judgment on such issues as resolving conflicts in testimony, measuring
the credibility of witnesses, and determining the weight to be given evidence.
In the Matter of Aube & Aube, 158 N.H. 459, 465 (2009). We conclude that the
record supports the trial court’s implied and expressed findings.

The parties testified that after the incident involving the dogs, the
plaintiff approached the defendant. The trial court found that, during this
exchange, the defendant’s dog “nipped” the plaintiff in the knee, causing the
skin to be broken. The court also found, however, that the plaintiff failed to
prove recoverable damages resulting from the “nip.” The plaintiff has the
burden to prove damages. Mahoney v. Town of Canterbury, 150 N.H. 148, 154
(2003). We conclude that the record supports the trial court’s finding that the
plaintiff failed to prove that she suffered damages caused by the “nip” to her
knee.

Finally, the plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in precluding
testimony allegedly admissible under Rule 608. The New Hampshire Rules of
Evidence do not apply in small claims cases. See RSA 503:7 (2010). We review
a trial court’s decision on the admissibility of evidence under our
unsustainable exercise of discretion standard. Figlioli v. R.J. Moreau Cos., 151
N.H. 618, 626 (2005). The plaintiff sought to introduce evidence that the
defendant attended a high school other than the one that she testified she
attended, and that the neighbor had a criminal record. Based upon this
record, we cannot conclude that the trial court unsustainably exercised its
discretion in precluding this testimony. See id.

To the extent that the plaintiff raises additional arguments, we conclude
that they are inadequately developed, see State v. Blackmer, 149 N.H. 47, 49
(2003), not preserved, see Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250-51
(2004), and warrant no further discussion, see Vogel v. Vogel, 137 N.H. 321,
322 (1993); see also In the Matter of Birmingham & Birmingham, 154 N.H. 51,
56 (2006) (self-represented litigants are bound by the same procedural rules
that govern parties represented by counsel).

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk

2