New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 458:7-a (2026)

Absolute Divorce, Irreconcilable Differences

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

458:7-a Absolute Divorce, Irreconcilable Differences. – A divorce from the bonds of matrimony shall be decreed, irrespective of the fault of either party, on the ground of irreconcilable differences which have caused the irremediable breakdown of the marriage. In any pleading or hearing of a petition for divorce under this section, allegations or evidence of specific acts of misconduct shall be improper and inadmissible, except where parental rights and responsibilities are an issue and such evidence is relevant to establish that a particular allocation of parental rights and responsibilities would be detrimental to the child or at a hearing where it is determined by the court to be necessary to establish the existence of irreconcilable differences. If, upon hearing of an action for divorce under this section, both parties are found to have committed an act or acts which justify a finding of irreconcilable differences, a divorce shall be decreed and the acts of one party shall not negate the acts of the other nor bar the divorce decree. The court's findings and decree may be based on oral testimony or written stipulations of the parties.

Source. 1971, 445:1. 1998, 53:1. 2004, 114:2. 2005, 273:2, eff. Oct. 1, 2005.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 53 cases, 1973–2020 · leading case: Susan Achille v. George Achille, Jr., 167 N.H. 706 (N.H. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Susan Achille v. George Achille, Jr., 167 N.H. 706 (N.H. 2015). · cites it 4× “See RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 2014). Consequently, the petitioner did not need to demonstrate one of the fault-based grounds, such as the “[e]xtreme cruelty of either party to the other,” or that “either party has so treated the other as seriously to injure health or endanger reason.”

In Re Nassar, 943 A.2d 740 (N.H. 2008). · cites it 3× “The husband also contends that the court should not have considered his conduct because the parties stipulated to a divorce on irreconcilable differences grounds and the court adopted their stipulation.”

In the Matter of Lynn Mortner & Theodore Mortner, 130 A.3d 584 (N.H. 2015). · cites it 5× “See RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 2015) (providing that, in the context of a divorce on the ground of irreconcilable differences, “[t]he [trial] court’s findings and decree may be based on oral testimony or written stipulations of the parties”).”

Murphy v. Murphy, 366 A.2d 479 (N.H. 1976). · cites it 4× “Both the libel and the cross-libel alleged irreconcilable differences, RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 1975), as the cause for the divorce.”

In Re Martel, 944 A.2d 575 (N.H. 2008). · cites it 2× “RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 2007). Following a three-day trial, the court granted a decree of divorce on the grounds that irreconcilable differences caused the irremediable breakdown *56 of the marriage.”

Baker v. Baker, 421 A.2d 998 (N.H. 1980). · cites it 2× “It is also true that the intent of the irreconcilable differences statute, RSA 458:7-a, was to “minimize the acrimony attending divorce proceedings” and that once irreconcilable differences have been pled and established, the introduction of fault evidence in respect to alimony…”

Ebbert v. Ebbert, 459 A.2d 282 (N.H. 1983). · cites it 3× “This appeal involves cross-libels for divorce brought by Thomas Ebbert against Linda Ebbert for adultery, RSA 458:7, II, and by Linda Ebbert against Thomas Ebbert for irreconcilable differences, RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 1979). The matter was tried before a Master (Peter J.”

In Re Costa, 937 A.2d 288 (N.H. 2007). “See RSA 458:7-a (Supp. 2006). Despite declining to assign fault in the breakdown of the parties’ marriage, the master recommended an unequal division of the parties’ marital assets: The recommended property division shall result [in] a greater than equal portion of the marital…”

In Re Sarvela, 910 A.2d 1214 (N.H. 2006). “RSA 458:7-a (2004). The trial court determined that a nearly equal distribution of assets was equitable.”

Desrochers v. Desrochers, 347 A.2d 150 (N.H. 1975). · cites it 5× “” The superior court transferred without ruling the question “whether, on all the findings of fact, cause exists for granting a divorce under the provisions of RSA 458:7-a.” This appeal was argued in September 1975.”

Douglas v. Douglas, 728 A.2d 215 (N.H. 1999). “See RSA 458:7-a (1992) (amended 1998). The defendant filed a cross-libel alleging that the breakdown of the marriage was caused by the plaintiff’s allegedly adulterous acts.”

In Re Mannion, 917 A.2d 1272 (N.H. 2007). “See RSA 458:7-a (2004). Affirmed. Broderick, C.”

Show all 53 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.