From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCarthy v. Motors

Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Dec 29, 2023
No. 2023-0283 (N.H. Dec. 29, 2023)

Opinion

2023-0283

12-29-2023

Albert McCarthy v. Macdonald Motors


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, Macdonald Motors, appeals a small claim judgment entered by the Circuit Court (Greenhalgh, J.), following an evidentiary hearing, awarding $7,424.73 plus costs to the plaintiff, Albert McCarthy, for breach of warranty on a used engine that the defendant sold and installed in the plaintiff's car. On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court's findings that the engine was not operating properly and that the plaintiff suffered damages in the amount of $7,424.73 as a result are not supported by the evidence and, thus, are clearly erroneous. We affirm.

It is the burden of the appealing party, in this case the defendant, to provide a record on appeal that is sufficient to decide the issues raised on appeal. See Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004). "If the [appealing] party intends to argue in the supreme court that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, the [appealing] party shall include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such finding or conclusion." Sup. Ct. R. 15(3). In the absence of a transcript of an evidentiary hearing, we assume that the evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact, and we review its decision only for errors of law appearing on the face of the order. See Bean, 151 N.H. at 250.

In this case, the defendant specifically answered "no" to the question in the notice of appeal inquiring whether a transcript of the trial court proceedings was necessary for the appeal, and consistent with that answer, the defendant has not provided a transcript of the evidentiary hearing held in the trial court. Accordingly, we must assume that the testimony and whatever other evidence was presented at trial supports the trial court's findings that the defendant breached its warranty and caused the defendant damages in the amount of $7,424.73. See id.

Affirmed.

MacDonald, CJ, and Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ, concurred.


Summaries of

McCarthy v. Motors

Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Dec 29, 2023
No. 2023-0283 (N.H. Dec. 29, 2023)
Case details for

McCarthy v. Motors

Case Details

Full title:Albert McCarthy v. Macdonald Motors

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Date published: Dec 29, 2023

Citations

No. 2023-0283 (N.H. Dec. 29, 2023)