In re Guardianship of Matthew L.

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the termination of Joan M.’s co-guardianship over Matthew L. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or new trial after the burden of proof shifted under In re Guardianship of Reena D. The court declined to address an unpreserved argument concerning whether the statutory termination standard is conjunctive or disjunctive, while noting that the legislature might consider the issue.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Joan's motion for a continuance or new trial.
2. The court declined to review the argument because Joan did not make a contemporaneous and specific objection in the trial court.
3. The court did not reach the argument because Joan failed to preserve it and had expressly agreed in the trial court that Reena D. governed the proceedings.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Joan's motion for a continuance or a new trial after Reena D. changed the allocation and standard of proof.
2. Whether the trial court improperly interpreted Reena D. to require Joan to prove both statutory grounds for continuing the consensual guardianship.
3. Whether Reena D. was inapplicable because the guardianship was used to create a two-parent family and Joan stood in loco parentis to Matthew.

Disposition

affirmed