Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Gronvaldt

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided February 17, 2004No. 2003-132Published

1DissentDalianis, J.

Respectfully, I dissent for two reasons. First, I believe that the trial court should have required expert testimony before granting a divorce pursuant to RSA 458:7, V (1992). Second, I believe that the evidence in this case was insufficient to support the trial court’s grant of divorce pursuant to RSA 458:7, V.

RSA 458:7, V addresses two fault-based grounds for divorce. The first, treatment that seriously injures health, refers to harm to “physical well-being.” Robinson v. Robinson, 66 N.H. 600, 609 (1891). The second, treatment that endangers reason, refers to “mental anguish” or having…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Corso v. MerrillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
  2. Wong v. EkbergSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002
  3. Robinson v. RobinsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
  4. Palmer v. Nan King Restaurant, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002
  5. Routhier v. RouthierSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1986

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API