Legal Opinion

In re Rohdenburg

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 17, 2003No. 2002-380PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNadeau, J.

The respondent, Brad D. Rohdenburg, appeals a recommendation of the Marital Master (Martha W. Copithome, Esq.), approved by the Superior Court (Perkins, J.), increasing his child support obligation. On appeal, the respondent argues that the master erred by accepting an incomplete financial affidavit from the petitioner, Jennie A. Louzan, contrary to Superior Court Rule 197 and by failing to address his request to decrease his support obligation based upon a substantial change in circumstances. We reverse and remand.

The following facts are relevant to our decision. In March 2002, the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Giles v. GilesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1992
  2. Shafmaster v. ShafmasterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1994
  3. DePalantino v. DePalantinoSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
  4. Logan v. LoganSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
  5. Cote v. CoteSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re AdamsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2007
  2. In Re LynnSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009
  3. Ginsberg v. NH Attorney GeneralDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2005
  4. In Re LynnSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009
  5. In re BazemoreSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API