The petitioner, Leon Stillwagon, appeals the trial court's order denying his petition for declaratory relief regarding a 1997 agreement with the respondent, Hitchiner Manufacturing Co., Inc. He argues that the court erred in: (1) concluding that the agreement was ambiguous and allowing extrinsic evidence to determine the date on which salary and benefits terminated under the agreement; (2) finding that the agreement provided him with a salary and benefits until he retired at age sixty-five; and (3) failing to find that the agreement was a modification of his 1991 employment agreement. We affirm.
As the appealing party, the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating reversible error. Gallo v. Traina, 166 N.H. __, __ (decided September 12, 2014). Based upon our review of the trial court's well-reasoned order, the petitioner's challenges to it, and the record submitted on appeal, we conclude that the petitioner has not demonstrated reversible error. See id.
HICKS, LYNN, and BASSETT, JJ., ...