Brandywyne Common Condominium v. Weixing V. Wang

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0399, Brandywyne Common
Condominium v. Weixing V. Wang, the court on October 18,
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 defendant, Weixing V. Wang, appeals orders of the Superior Court
(Honigberg, J.) granting summary judgment to the plaintiff, Brandywine
Commons Condominium, on its claim to recover certain unpaid assessments
and fines from him, and awarding the plaintiff $1,468.36 in damages and
$12,688.50 in attorney’s fees. We affirm.

When reviewing a trial court’s grant of summary judgment, we consider
the affidavits and other evidence, and all inferences properly drawn from them,
in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Clark v. N.H. Dep’t of
Emp’t Sec., 171 N.H. 639, 650 (2019). If our review of that evidence reveals no
genuine dispute of material fact, and if the moving party is entitled to judgment
as a matter of law, we will affirm the grant of summary judgment. Id. We
review the trial court’s application of law to the facts de novo. Id.

We will not overturn a trial court’s decision concerning attorney’s fees
absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion. Short v. LaPlante, 174 N.H.
384, 393 (2021). To warrant reversal, the discretion must have been exercised
for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable to the
prejudice of the aggrieved party on that issue. Id. In evaluating the trial
court’s ruling on this issue, we acknowledge the tremendous deference given a
trial court’s decision regarding attorney's fees. Id. If there is some support in
the record for the trial court’s determination, we will uphold it. Id.

As the appealing party, the defendant has the burden to demonstrate
reversible error. Gallo v. Traina, 166 N.H. 737, 740 (2014). Based upon our
review of the trial court’s well-reasoned orders, the defendant’s challenges to
them, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that
the defendant has not demonstrated that the court committed reversible error.
See id.

To the extent that the defendant argues that the trial judge demonstrated
bias against him, we note that adverse rulings alone do not establish judicial
bias. See State v. Bader, 148 N.H. 265, 271 (2002). Based upon our review of
the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that no reasonable person would
have questioned the judge’s impartiality and that no factors were present that
would have per se disqualified the trial judge from participating in this case.
See id. at 268-71.

In light of this order, the plaintiff’s request in its brief that we strike the
defendant’s brief is moot. The plaintiff’s request in its brief for an award of
attorney’s fees and costs incurred on appeal is granted. Consistent with Rule
23, the plaintiff may file a motion for taxation of costs and attorney’s fees, and
shall support the motion with an affidavit of counsel establishing the
reasonableness of the attorney’s fees it incurred in defending this
appeal. Failure to comply with Rule 23 or this order shall be deemed a waiver
of an award of attorney’s fees and costs incurred on appeal.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk

2