C.S. v. R.S. ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                     THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
    SUPREME COURT
    In Case No. 2023-0130, C.S. v. R.S., the court on June 5,
    2023, issued the following order:
    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). The defendant, R.S., appeals a civil stalking final order of
    protection issued by the Circuit Court (Prevett, J.), following a hearing, in favor
    of the plaintiff, C.S. See RSA 633:3-a, III-a (Supp. 2022). We construe the
    defendant’s brief to be challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support
    the trial court’s decision.
    We review sufficiency of the evidence claims as a matter of law, and will
    uphold the trial court’s findings and rulings unless they lack evidentiary
    support or are tainted by error of law. Despres v. Hampsey, 
    162 N.H. 398
    , 401
    (2011). We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff,
    deferring to the trial court’s judgment in evaluating the credibility of the
    witnesses and the weight of the evidence presented. 
    Id.
     It is the defendant’s
    burden, as the appealing party, to provide a record on appeal that is sufficient
    to decide the issues the defendant is raising, and absent a transcript, we
    assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s decision,
    and review its order for errors of law appearing on the face of the order only.
    Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 
    151 N.H. 248
    , 250 (2004); Atwood v. Owens,
    
    142 N.H. 396
    , 396-97 (1997). In this case, the defendant has not provided a
    transcript of the evidentiary hearing on the plaintiff’s stalking petition.
    Accordingly, we assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial
    court’s decision, and finding no errors of law on the face of the trial court’s
    order, we affirm. In light of this order, the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider our
    order of May 11, 2023 and for late entry of a brief or memorandum of law is
    moot.
    Affirmed.
    MacDonald, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
    concurred.
    Timothy A. Gudas,
    Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2023-0130

Filed Date: 6/5/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/12/2024