AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves multiple parties with intertwined legal claims and counterclaims. The Campbells initiated a lawsuit against the Breshears, Paul Legler, and AG New Mexico, FCS, PCA, with subsequent cross-claims, counterclaims, and third-party claims involving these parties and additional third-party defendants, Curtis and Mary Breshears, and Gretchen Legler. The core of the dispute appears to revolve around unresolved claims between these parties, although specific details of the events leading to the litigation are not provided.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Breshears: Argued that final judgment has been entered on all matters between themselves and AG New Mexico and believed that the remaining matters had been resolved, no longer pursued, and no further action was expected by any of the parties involved (CN 5-6, MIO 2).
• AG New Mexico, FCS, PCA: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court's order granting AG New Mexico an in rem judgment against Breshears constitutes a final order pursuant to Rule 1-054(B)(2) NMRA, given the existence of outstanding claims involving multiple parties.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of a final order.

Reasons

• RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge, with JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge, and J. MILES HANISEE, Judge concurring, reasoned that an order or judgment is not final unless all issues of law and fact have been determined and the case disposed of by the trial court to the fullest extent possible. The court noted unresolved claims between the parties and found that Breshears' argument and belief that final judgment had been entered on all matters between Breshears and AG New Mexico did not meet the criteria for a final judgment for purposes of appeal, as they did not provide any authority demonstrating that an order resolving all claims between two parties, where those parties are still involved in other claims with other parties, is a final judgment for purposes of appeal. Furthermore, Breshears' assertion that the remaining matters had been resolved was deemed insufficient to render the judgment final, as the record did not reflect that the claims had been dismissed or otherwise resolved by the district court (CN 3, CN 5-6, MIO 2).