Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

119 N.H. 426

Cotter v. Cotter

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 23, 1979

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1979-05-23

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently February 1985

13 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““There is no transcript in this case, and a review of the record before us shows no inconsistency between findings and rulings and the report; further, there are revealed no errors of law. We therefore cannot say that the court abused its discretion with regard to the support order and the division of property.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Cornforth v. Cornforth

Relies on McCrady v. Mahon · Hunneyman v. Hunneyman · Greenglass v. Greenglass

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1979-05-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Memorandum Opinion

¶2 The issue raised in this divorce case is whether the trial court’s order regarding division of property and alimony should be set aside.

¶3 The parties were married on March 27,1973, and were divorced by decree dated October 11,1978. Title to a condominium and all stocks, bonds and the like in the name of plaintiff were decreed to him. All stocks, bonds, and the like in the name of defendant were decreed to her. Plaintiff was ordered to pay defendant $600, which was money deposited by her to cover checks written by plaintiff. Support and alimony were specifically denied.

¶4 The decree was entered on the recommendation of the Master, Henry P. Sullivan Esq., after a hearing without a transcript, and defendant’s exceptions were transferred by Bean, J.

¶5 Without a record in this case, we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in not awarding support or alimony. McCrady v. Mahon, 119 N.H. 247, 400 A.2d 1173 (1979); Hunneyman v. Hunneyman, 118 N.H. 652, 392 A.2d 147 (1978); Greenglass v. Greenglass, 118 N.H. 570, 391 A.2d 890 (1978).

¶6 Exceptions overruled.

/119/nh/426 · .json · Public domain