In re Henry
163 N.H. 175
| N.H. | 2012Background
- Parties were married ~36 years; no biological children but respondent adopted petitioner’s son in 1979.
- Petitioner petitioned for fault-based divorce on the ground that respondent seriously injured health or endangered reason (RSA 458:7, V).
- Disclosed May 14, 2009 that respondent abused the son when the son was 12–13 years old; petition filed May 22, 2009.
- Trial court credited petitioner’s and son’s testimony and messages from respondent; found conduct seriously injured health or endangered reason.
- Alimony awarded: $1,500/month until respondent retires and begins pension; assets divided ~53% petitioner/47% respondent; respondent challenges fault finding, alimony, and property division.
- Record on appeal notes missing requested findings; court assumes they support the trial court’s decision and may review more broadly than the recited findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fault-based divorce satisfied by conduct? | Henry contends conduct did not seriously injure health or endanger reason. | Henry argues past conduct long ago cannot sustain fault-based divorce. | Yes; record supports serious injury to health/reason and substantial evidence supports the finding. |
| Alimony appropriate and amount justified? | Henry asserts trial court failed to properly weigh factors or justify alimony. | Henry argues court erred in awarding alimony given financial circumstances. | Court acted within broad discretion; statutory factors and evidence support alimony award. |
| Property distribution equitable? | Henry challenges unequal distribution and debt allocations. | Henry claims he should receive more real estate, retirement assets, and responsibility for debts. | Distribution does not require reversal; court’s fault finding and broad discretion supported. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Guardianship of Nicholas P., 162 N.H. 199 (2011) (reviewing scope of findings; not limited to trial narrative)
- In the Matter of Guy & Guy, 158 N.H. 411 (2009) (‘seriously’ modifies injure health and endanger reason; health impact required)
- In the Matter of Peirano & Larsen, 155 N.H. 738 (2007) (emotional distress supports fault-based grounds)
- In the Matter of Gronvaldt & Gronvaldt, 150 N.H. 551 (2004) (emotional distress and counseling evidence sufficient)
- Routhier v. Routhier, 128 N.H. 439 (1986) (wife’s counseling and distress evidence considered)
- Morgan v. Morgan, 101 N.H. 470 (1958) (wife’s nervousness and weight loss as support for fault-based claim)
- Szulc v. Szulc, 96 N.H. 190 (1950) (weight loss and distress evidence accepted)
- Costa & Costa, 156 N.H. 323 (2007) (equitable division; inherited property considered but not weighted)