Peter N. Bookas v. Irene Liakakos

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT
In Case No. 2014-0764, Peter N. Bookas v. Irene Liakakos,
the court on June 19, 2015, issued the following order:
Having considered the briefs and record submitted on appeal, we conclude
that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.
The plaintiff, Peter Bookas, appeals an order of the Superior Court
(Temple, J.) dismissing, for failure to state a claim, his complaint against the
defendant, Irene Liakakos. The plaintiff contends that “[t]his case should be
remanded to the superior court for an oral hearing and reconsideration” because
he has new evidence, consisting of his affidavit, that the defendant “made a
misrepresentation when conveying to herself joint tenant rights” in real property
belonging to him and that the defendant “made materially false statements that
the document [he] was signing . . . was a will.”
It is a long-standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of issues
they did not raise in the trial court. Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248,
250 (2004). The record does not establish that the plaintiff moved to amend his
complaint to include the alleged misrepresentations, see Tessier v. Rockefeller,
162 N.H. 324, 332 (2011) (stating fraud must be pleaded with specificity), or
otherwise brought the new allegations to the trial court’s attention in a timely
motion for reconsideration, see Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(e); N.H. Dep’t of Corrections
v. Butland, 147 N.H. 676, 679 (2002). Therefore, we conclude that the plaintiff’s
argument is not preserved for our review.
Affirmed.
Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
Eileen Fox,
Clerk