THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2015-0359, Ralph Langevin, Trustee of the Ralph Langevin Revocable Trust v. Lester W. Firstenberger & a., the court on January 11, 2016, 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 defendant, Lester Firstenberger, appeals summary judgment orders of the Superior Court (Houran, Garfunkel, and Temple, JJ.), in favor of the plaintiff, Ralph Langevin as Trustee of the Ralph Langevin Revocable Trust, in an action to collect a debt owed on a promissory note. The defendant argues that the trial court erred in concluding that there was no genuine issue of fact as to whether the July 14, 2011 demand letter from the plaintiff’s collection attorney accelerated the amounts due on the note. He also argues that the trial court erred in construing the plaintiff’s pleadings to allege an acceleration date of July 14, 2011, when the date the plaintiff used to calculate damages in his writ of summons and first summary judgment motion was no later than May 16, 2008.

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 orders, the defendant’s challenges to them, the relevant law, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the defendant has not demonstrated reversible error. See id.

Affirmed.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.

Eileen Fox, Clerk