In the Matter of Edward Hewey and Heather Hewey

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0390, In the Matter of Edward Hewey and
Heather Hewey, the court on September 15, 2022, issued the
following order:

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). The petitioner, Edward Hewey (Husband), appeals the final decree of the
Circuit Court (DalPra, M., approved by Curran, J.) in his divorce from the
respondent, Heather Hewey (Wife). We affirm.

The trial court has broad discretion in fashioning a final divorce decree. In
the Matter Spenard & Spenard, 167 N.H. 1, 3 (2014). Its discretion encompasses
decisions concerning alimony, child support, and the division of marital property
and debt. Id.; In the Matter of Muller & Muller, 164 N.H. 512, 518 (2013). Its
discretion likewise includes assigning weight to evidence and evaluating the
credibility of witnesses. In the Matter of Summers & Summers, 172 N.H. 474,
479 (2019).

We will not overturn the trial court’s rulings absent an unsustainable
exercise of discretion. Spenard, 167 N.H. at 3. Accordingly, our review is limited
to whether there is an objective basis sufficient to sustain the trial court’s
discretionary judgments. Id. Conflicts in testimony, questions about the
credibility of witnesses, and the weight assigned to testimony are matters for the
trial court to resolve. Summers, 172 N.H. at 479. The trial court’s factual
findings are binding upon us if they are supported by the evidence and are not
legally erroneous. Id. If the trial court’s findings could reasonably have been
made on the evidence before it, they will stand. Spenard, 167 N.H. at 3.

On appeal, Husband challenges the trial court’s property distribution,
alimony award, child support award, and its decision to award Wife $5,000 as
reasonable attorney’s fees because he “willfully failed to comply with previous
court orders.” Specifically, he argues that (1) the trial court’s unequal division of
the marital estate was inequitable; (2) Wife was not entitled to alimony because
she “failed to establish that she lacks sufficient income or property to meet her
reasonable needs”; (3) Wife should have been ordered to provide child support to
Husband; and (4) the court “unjustly punished [him] twice for the same
contempt” by ordering him to pay Wife $5,000 in attorney’s fees.

We are limited in our ability to review the merits of Husband’s arguments
because he has failed to provide a complete record for our review. For instance,
the transcripts reveal that the parties introduced multiple exhibits at trial relative
to their financial circumstances, yet Husband has provided none of those
exhibits as part of the record on appeal.

Additionally, the trial court found that Husband “failed to comply with
many court orders,” including an order that he provide health insurance. Wife
testified that she brought several contempt motions against Husband related to
his failure to provide health insurance and alimony, among other things. She
also testified that the trial court deferred ruling on some of her contempt motions
until the final hearing and that she sought attorney’s fees in connection with
those motions. Yet, Husband did not provide in the appellate record Wife’s
contempt motions or any objection he filed to them. And, although he has
provided the trial court’s September 2020 order fining him $300 for violating a
court order that precluded his girlfriend from having contact with the parties’
children, he has not provided copies of the other orders to which the trial court
and Wife alluded.

As the appealing party, Husband had the burden of providing this court
with a record sufficient to decide his issues on appeal. Bean v. Red Oak Prop.
Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see Sup. Ct. R. 13. Without a complete record,
we must assume that the evidence supported the trial court’s decision. See
Bean, 151 N.H. at 250. We review the court’s decree for errors of law only, see
Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396, 397 (1997), and find none.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk

2