Arnold Communications v. Shahryar Pezeshki et al.

In Case No. 2021-0311, Arnold Communications, LLC v.

Shahryar Pezeshki & a., the court on September 16, 2022, issued the following order: Having considered the parties’ briefs and the limited record submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup.

Ct. R. 18(1). The defendants, Shahryar Pezeshki and Gandom & Company, LLC, appeal an order of the Circuit Court (Pendleton, J.) entering judgment of $8,320.44 in favor of the plaintiff, Arnold Communications, LLC, on its small claim. We affirm.

On appeal, the defendants argue that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s decision. We are unable to review this argument substantively because the defendants have failed to provide a sufficient record for our review. As the appealing parties, the defendants have the burden of providing us with a record sufficient to decide their appellate issues. Bean v.

Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250, (2004); see Sup. Ct. R.

13. The defendants have not provided a transcript of the hearing on the merits. Absent a complete record, we must assume that the evidence supported the trial court’s decision. See Bean, 151 N.H. at 250. We review the court’s order for errors of law only, see Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396, 397 (1997), and find none.

Affirmed.

MacDonald, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ., concurred.

Timothy A. Gudas, Clerk