In the Matter of Michael Dalton and Mindy Hardy
In the Matter of Michael Dalton and Mindy Hardy, No. 2021-0549 (N.H. Oct. 27, 2022).
The holding in the court’s own words
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2021-0549, In the Matter of Michael Dalton and Mindy Hardy, the court on October 27, 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. Based upon our review of the trial court’s well-reasoned order, the respondent’s arguments, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the respondent has not demonstrated reversible error.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Ralph P. Gallo & a. v. Susan Traina & a. 166 N.H. 737
Opinion text
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT
In Case No. 2021-0549, In the Matter of Michael Dalton and
Mindy Hardy, the court on October 27, 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 respondent, Mindy Hardy, appeals an order recommended by a
judicial referee (Foley, R.) and approved by the Circuit Court (Lown, J.) denying
her motion to modify the final parenting plan entered in her divorce from the
petitioner, Michael Dalton. We affirm.
As the appealing party, the respondent 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 well-reasoned order, the respondent’s arguments, the
relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the
respondent has not demonstrated reversible error. See id.
Affirmed.
MacDonald, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
concurred.
Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk