American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia

DecidedJanuary 14, 2022

Docket2021-0315

StatusUnpublished

This text of American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia (American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia, (N.H. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0315, American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia, the court on January 14, 2022, issued the following order:

Having considered the defendant’s brief, the plaintiff’s memorandum of law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). The defendant, Linda A. Petralia, appeals the granting of summary judgment by the Superior Court (Temple, J.) in favor of the plaintiff, American Express National Bank. She argues that granting the plaintiff summary judgment was in error because, she claims, the trial court had already entered a “final and binding” dismissal of the case several months earlier. In its memorandum of law, the plaintiff asserts, and the defendant has not disputed, that five days after the earlier dismissal order, the plaintiff moved to vacate the dismissal, and that the trial court granted its motion and vacated the dismissal two weeks later.

Until a case has gone to final judgment, the trial court retains broad discretion to reconsider any decision in order to correct error, including a decision dismissing the case. Goudreault v. Kleeman, 158 N.H. 236, 249 (2009); Redlon Co. v. Corporation, 91 N.H. 502, 503, 505-06 (1941). A non- appealed dismissal does not go to final judgment until either the thirty-first day from the trial court’s notice of decision on the dismissal, or, if a timely post- dismissal motion was filed, the thirty-first day from the notice of decision on a ruling denying that motion. Super. Ct. R. 46(d)(1), (2); see Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 159 N.H. 725, 729 (2010) (observing that, under predecessor to Rule 46, trial court’s final order became a “final judgment” thirty-one days after the trial court had issued its decision). Here, the trial court vacated its dismissal order well before the dismissal went to final judgment. Accordingly, the dismissal did not preclude the subsequent granting of summary judgment.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas, Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0315, American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia, the court on January 14, 2022, issued the following order:

Having considered the defendant’s brief, the plaintiff’s memorandum of law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). The defendant, Linda A. Petralia, appeals the granting of summary judgment by the Superior Court (Temple, J.) in favor of the plaintiff, American Express National Bank. She argues that granting the plaintiff summary judgment was in error because, she claims, the trial court had already entered a “final and binding” dismissal of the case several months earlier. In its memorandum of law, the plaintiff asserts, and the defendant has not disputed, that five days after the earlier dismissal order, the plaintiff moved to vacate the dismissal, and that the trial court granted its motion and vacated the dismissal two weeks later.

Until a case has gone to final judgment, the trial court retains broad discretion to reconsider any decision in order to correct error, including a decision dismissing the case. Goudreault v. Kleeman, 158 N.H. 236, 249 (2009); Redlon Co. v. Corporation, 91 N.H. 502, 503, 505-06 (1941). A non- appealed dismissal does not go to final judgment until either the thirty-first day from the trial court’s notice of decision on the dismissal, or, if a timely post- dismissal motion was filed, the thirty-first day from the notice of decision on a ruling denying that motion. Super. Ct. R. 46(d)(1), (2); see Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 159 N.H. 725, 729 (2010) (observing that, under predecessor to Rule 46, trial court’s final order became a “final judgment” thirty-one days after the trial court had issued its decision). Here, the trial court vacated its dismissal order well before the dismissal went to final judgment. Accordingly, the dismissal did not preclude the subsequent granting of summary judgment.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas, Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

American Express National Bank v. Linda A. Petralia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-express-national-bank-v-linda-a-petralia-nh-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack