Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Decision Information
Rule Set 12 - Rules of Appellate Procedure - cited by 9,410 documents
Decision Content
SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS LUTHERAN CHURCH, INC. V. KROHN
This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of Appeals.
SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS LUTHERAN CHURCH, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
KEVIN KROHN and KAREN KROHN,
Defendants-Appellants.
Docket No. A-1-CA-37698
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
May 31, 2019
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LINCOLN COUNTY, Steven Blankinship, District Judge
COUNSEL
Adam Daniel Rafkin, Ruidoso, NM for Appellee
Kevin Krohn, Karen L. Krohn, Ruidoso, NM Pro Se Appellants.
JUDGES
M. MONICA ZAMORA, Chief Judge. WE CONCUR: JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge, KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION
M. ZAMORA, Chief Judge.
{1} Defendants, self-represented litigants, appeal from the district court’s judgment, after a jury trial, for compensatory and punitive damages. In this Court’s notice of proposed disposition, we proposed to dismiss based on an untimely notice of appeal. Defendants and Plaintiff filed memoranda in opposition and support, respectively, which we have duly considered. By their MIO, Defendants essentially argue that the appellate rules regarding the deadlines for filing notices of appeal are contradictory. Plaintiff argues that not only are there no conflicts or ambiguities regarding the deadlines for filing notices of appeal in our appellate rules, but, in any event, Defendants are not entitled to an additional nineteen-day extension beyond the thirty-day extension, which the district court denied. We are unpersuaded that there is any conflict or ambiguity in the appellate rules regarding deadlines for filing notices of appeal. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in our notice of proposed disposition and herein, we dismiss the appeal as untimely.
{2} IT IS SO ORDERED.
M. MONICA ZAMORA, Chief Judge
WE CONCUR:
JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge
KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge