THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2014-0306, Shepherds Hill Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Shepherds Hill Development Co., LLC, the court on April 2, 2015, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, the court concludes that a formal written opinion is unnecessary in this case. The defendant, Shepherds Hill Development Co., LLC, appeals an order of the Superior Court (Colburn, J.) granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Shepherds Hill Homeowners Association, Inc. The trial court concluded, as a matter of law, that the defendant’s February 22, 2013 amendment to the condominium declaration, which created three “Land Only Units” from undeveloped portions of the condominium common area: (1) did not create “unit[s]” as defined in RSA 356-B:3, XXIX (2009); (2) violated the express wording as well as the spirit of RSA 356-B:23, III (2009), which states that a developer has no more than ten years to convert convertible lands; (3) violated two purposes of the New Hampshire Condominium Act, RSA ch. 356-B (2009) – to protect buyers and establish reasonable expectations among parties; and (4) violated both the plain wording and spirit of the condominium declaration. On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court erred by not finding that: (1) valid and legal land units were created by the amendment; (2) the amendment complied with RSA 356-B:23; and (3) the amendment was consistent with the condominium declaration. We affirm.

As the appealing party, the defendant has the burden of demonstrating reversible error. Gallo v. Traina, 166 N.H. 737, 740 (2014). Based upon our review of the trial court’s well-reasoned order, the defendant’s challenges to it, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the defendant has not demonstrated reversible error. Id. Affirmed.

DALIANIS, C.J., and HICKS, CONBOY, LYNN, and BASSETT, JJ., concurred.

Eileen Fox, Clerk