Supreme Court of New Mexico

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Appellate Reports
Wagner v. Eaton - cited by 6 documents

Decision Content

CREDIT COLLECTIONS SERVS. V. STEIN, 1973-NMSC-054, 85 N.M. 227, 511 P.2d 553 (S. Ct. 1973)

CREDIT COLLECTION SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
CHARLES J. STEIN, Defendant-Appellant

No. 9607

SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO

1973-NMSC-054, 85 N.M. 227, 511 P.2d 553

May 25, 1973

Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Larrazolo, Judge

Motion for Rehearing Denied July 2, 1973

COUNSEL

RODEY, DICKASON, SLOAN, AKIN & ROBB, PETER G. PRINA, DANIEL E. DUNCAN, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Appellee.

CHARLES J. STEIN, Pro Se, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

JUDGES

OMAN, Justice, wrote the opinion.

WE CONCUR:

Donnan Stephenson, J., Joe L. Martinez, J.

AUTHOR: OMAN

OPINION

OMAN, Justice.

{1} By defendant's own admission, the amount in dispute in this cause is $38.52, plus his claim for costs incurred in the justice of the peace court, where this case had its beginning on February 28, 1968, and costs in the district court to which defendant secured a delayed appeal from the judgment entered against him in the justice of the peace court. The appeal to the district court was in fact a complete trial de novo, and the proceedings in that court also ended in a judgment for plaintiff. The case is now before us on appeal by defendant from this judgment.

{2} He has failed in several respects to comply with the rules of this Court in the preparation of his briefs. Only because he is appearing pro se and is not an attorney have we disregarded these failures and given full consideration to his arguments and the pertinent portions of the record.

{3} However, we are not disposed to encourage appeals to this Court in which so little is involved. Wagner v. Eaton, et al., 2 N.M. 211 (1882). Because we find no prejudicial error and the amount involved is so trifling, we affirm without discussion of the points relied upon by defendant for reversal. Scholte v. Walker, 87 Neb. 406, 127 N.W. 123 (1910). See also Moodie v. Jenks, 329 Mass. 332, 108 N.E.2d 558 (1952); Guinane v. Hogan, 78 Ill. App. 272 (1898).

{4} The judgment should be affirmed.

{5} IT IS SO ORDERED.

WE CONCUR:

Donnan Stephenson, J., Joe L. Martinez, J.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.