Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns

DecidedApril 29, 2016

Docket2015-0607

StatusUnpublished

This text of Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns (Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns) 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

Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns, (N.H. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2015-0607, Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns, the court on April 29, 2016, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief, memorandum of law, and limited record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.

The defendant, Jaye Burns, appeals the order of the Superior Court (McNamara, J.) denying his motion to vacate a final judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff, Thomas Svoleantopoulos. In his brief, he raises a number of factual issues.

It is the burden of the appealing party, here the defendant, to provide this court with a record sufficient to decide his issues on appeal, as well as to demonstrate that he raised his issues in the trial court. Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup. Ct. R. 15(3) (“If the moving party intends to argue in the supreme court that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, he shall include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such finding or conclusion.”); Town of Nottingham v. Newman, 147 N.H. 131, 137 (2001) (rules of appellate practice not relaxed for self-represented litigants).

In this case, the defendant has failed to provide a transcript of any hearings held in the trial court or any other record of the trial court proceedings sufficient to decide his issues on appeal or to demonstrate that he raised his issues in the trial court. See Bean, 151 N.H. at 250. Accordingly, we assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s order. See Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396, 396 (1997).

Moreover, the defendant has failed to identify any error by the trial court in denying his motion; nor has he provided any developed legal argument to support his appeal. See Appeal of Omega Entm’t, 156 N.H. 282, 287 (2007) (judicial review not warranted for complaints regarding adverse rulings without developed legal argument).

Affirmed.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, 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. 2015-0607, Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns, the court on April 29, 2016, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief, memorandum of law, and limited record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.

The defendant, Jaye Burns, appeals the order of the Superior Court (McNamara, J.) denying his motion to vacate a final judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff, Thomas Svoleantopoulos. In his brief, he raises a number of factual issues.

It is the burden of the appealing party, here the defendant, to provide this court with a record sufficient to decide his issues on appeal, as well as to demonstrate that he raised his issues in the trial court. Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004); see also Sup. Ct. R. 15(3) (“If the moving party intends to argue in the supreme court that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, he shall include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such finding or conclusion.”); Town of Nottingham v. Newman, 147 N.H. 131, 137 (2001) (rules of appellate practice not relaxed for self-represented litigants).

In this case, the defendant has failed to provide a transcript of any hearings held in the trial court or any other record of the trial court proceedings sufficient to decide his issues on appeal or to demonstrate that he raised his issues in the trial court. See Bean, 151 N.H. at 250. Accordingly, we assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s order. See Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396, 396 (1997).

Moreover, the defendant has failed to identify any error by the trial court in denying his motion; nor has he provided any developed legal argument to support his appeal. See Appeal of Omega Entm’t, 156 N.H. 282, 287 (2007) (judicial review not warranted for complaints regarding adverse rulings without developed legal argument).

Affirmed.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.

Eileen Fox, Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Thomas Svoleantopoulos v. Jaye Burns, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-svoleantopoulos-v-jaye-burns-nh-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack