In the Matter of Jason Young and Megan Henderson

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2022-0434, In the Matter of Jason Young and
Megan Henderson, the court on April 7, 2023, issued the
following order:

The motion filed by the petitioner, Jason Young (Father), to add contempt
charges as an issue to this appeal is denied without prejudice to seeking relief in
the trial court for the alleged contempt of the respondent, Megan Henderson
(Mother). Father’s motion to amend his brief and appendices is granted.

The court has reviewed the written arguments and the record submitted on
appeal, and has determined to resolve the case by way of this order. See Sup. Ct.
R. 20(2). Father appeals the child support order issued by the Circuit Court
(Greenhalgh, J.) in this parenting case. We affirm.

The trial court has broad discretion in ordering child support. In the
Matter of Braunstein & Braunstein, 173 N.H. 38, 46 (2020). We will not overturn
the trial court’s rulings on such matters absent an unsustainable exercise of
discretion. Id. at 47. This standard of review means that we review only whether
the record establishes an objective basis sufficient to sustain the discretionary
judgment made, and we will not disturb the trial court’s determination if it could
reasonably have been made. Id. We will not substitute our judgment for that of
the trial court or reweigh equities. Id. We also defer to the trial court’s judgment
in matters of conflicting testimony, evaluating witness credibility, and deciding
the weight to be accorded evidence. Id.

On appeal, Father argues that the trial court erred by ordering a downward
deviation from the child support guidelines based upon Mother’s “extraordinarily
low income.” We uphold the trial court’s determination that a downward
deviation from the child support guidelines was warranted because there is
record support for the determination and it is not contrary to law. See id. Based
upon our review of the written arguments, the relevant law, the record on appeal,
and the trial court’s decision, we find Father’s arguments to the contrary
unpersuasive, and we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk