Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care

DecidedMay 3, 2019

Docket2018-0656

StatusUnpublished

This text of Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care (Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care) 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

Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, (N.H. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2018-0656, Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, the court on May 3, 2019, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief filed by the plaintiff, Jessica Jacqueson, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). The plaintiff appeals an order recommended by a Judicial Referee (Kent, R.) and approved by the Circuit Court (Lyons, J.) entering judgment for the defendant, TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, on the plaintiff’s small claims action seeking reimbursement for the $5,261.80 she expended to repair her vehicle. We affirm.

The trial court concluded that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proving that the defendant acted negligently. On appeal, the plaintiff contends that: (1) the defendant violated the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act (CPA) “due to [its] misleading and inability to repair [her] vehicle appropriately and in a timely manner”; and (2) the record does not support the trial court’s findings. As to her first argument, the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she raised her CPA claim in the trial court. As to her second argument, the plaintiff has failed to provide a record sufficient for our review.

It is the burden of the appealing party, here the plaintiff, to provide this court with a record sufficient to decide her issues on appeal, as well as to demonstrate that she raised her issues before the trial court. See Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup. Ct. R. 13. Here, the plaintiff has not provided a copy of her small claims complaint as part of the appellate record. Nor has she provided a copy of the transcript of the hearing on the merits. Thus, we decline to address the plaintiff’s CPA claim because she has not demonstrated that she raised this claim in the trial court. Moreover, absent a transcript, we must assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s decision, and our review is limited to legal errors apparent on the face of the record. Rix v. Kinderworks Corp., 136 N.H. 548, 553 (1992). Because the plaintiff has failed to persuade us that the trial court committed legal error, we uphold its decision. See id.

Affirmed.

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

Eileen Fox, 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. 2018-0656, Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, the court on May 3, 2019, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief filed by the plaintiff, Jessica Jacqueson, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). The plaintiff appeals an order recommended by a Judicial Referee (Kent, R.) and approved by the Circuit Court (Lyons, J.) entering judgment for the defendant, TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, on the plaintiff’s small claims action seeking reimbursement for the $5,261.80 she expended to repair her vehicle. We affirm.

The trial court concluded that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proving that the defendant acted negligently. On appeal, the plaintiff contends that: (1) the defendant violated the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act (CPA) “due to [its] misleading and inability to repair [her] vehicle appropriately and in a timely manner”; and (2) the record does not support the trial court’s findings. As to her first argument, the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she raised her CPA claim in the trial court. As to her second argument, the plaintiff has failed to provide a record sufficient for our review.

It is the burden of the appealing party, here the plaintiff, to provide this court with a record sufficient to decide her issues on appeal, as well as to demonstrate that she raised her issues before the trial court. See Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup. Ct. R. 13. Here, the plaintiff has not provided a copy of her small claims complaint as part of the appellate record. Nor has she provided a copy of the transcript of the hearing on the merits. Thus, we decline to address the plaintiff’s CPA claim because she has not demonstrated that she raised this claim in the trial court. Moreover, absent a transcript, we must assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s decision, and our review is limited to legal errors apparent on the face of the record. Rix v. Kinderworks Corp., 136 N.H. 548, 553 (1992). Because the plaintiff has failed to persuade us that the trial court committed legal error, we uphold its decision. See id.

Affirmed.

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

Eileen Fox, Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jessica Jacqueson v. TangID Automotive, LLP a/k/a AAMCO Transmissions & Total Care, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jessica-jacqueson-v-tangid-automotive-llp-aka-aamco-transmissions-nh-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack