Khaled Abdel-Fattah v. Fatima Belal; Fatima Belal v. Khaled Abdel-Fattah

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0037, Khaled Abdel-Fattah v. Fatima
Belal; Fatima Belal v. Khaled Abdel-Fattah, the court on
December 17, 2021, issued the following order:

The motion filed by Khaled Abdel-Fattah on November 1, 2021 to “strike
answers to questions submitted by Fatima Belal on October 27, 2021,” is
partially denied as it pertains to Ms. Belal’s brief and partially granted as it
pertains to the appendix to Ms. Belal’s brief. Mr. Abdel-Fattah’s November 12,
2021 motion to strike Ms. Belal’s objection is deemed to be a reply to her
objection and, because it was filed without prior court permission, it will not be
considered. See Rule 21(3-A). Ms. Belal’s motion to strike Mr. Abdel-Fattah’s
November 12, 2021 motion to strike is, therefore, moot. Also moot are Ms.
Belal’s November 22, 2021 objection and Mr. Abdel-Fattah’s November 29,
2021 motion to strike that objection.

Having considered the parties’ briefs and the record submitted on appeal,
we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R.
18(1). Mr. Abdel-Fattah, appeals orders of the Superior Court (Temple, J.)
denying his motions to: (1) vacate a judgment in favor of Ms. Belal, which
became final in May 2018; and (2) grant him a new trial on the matter that
resulted in the May 2018 judgment. We affirm.

As the appealing party, Mr. Abdel-Fattah 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 orders, Mr. Abdel-Fattah’s challenges
to them, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude
that he has not demonstrated reversible error. See id.

Affirmed.

MacDonald, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
concurred.

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk