AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Decision Content

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 U.S. Bank National Association as the Plaintiff-Appellee against Ronald Haynes, the Defendant-Appellant, with Lesley Haynes and New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority also listed as Defendants. The specific events leading to the appeal are not detailed in the provided text.

Procedural History

  • Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Nan G. Nash, District Judge, with the decision date not provided in the text.

Parties' Submissions

  • Plaintiff-Appellee (U.S. Bank National Association): Arguments and evidence presented by the Plaintiff-Appellee are not detailed in the provided text (N/A).
  • Defendant-Appellant (Ronald Haynes): The Defendant-Appellant did not file a memorandum opposing the proposed summary affirmance, and the time for doing so has expired (para 1).
  • Defendant (Lesley Haynes): Arguments and evidence presented by Lesley Haynes are not detailed in the provided text (N/A).
  • Defendant (New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority): Arguments and evidence presented by the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority are not detailed in the provided text.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the District Court's decision should be affirmed due to the absence of a memorandum opposing the proposed summary affirmance (para 1).

Disposition

  • The Court of Appeals of New Mexico affirmed the decision of the District Court of Bernalillo County (para 2).

Reasons

  • Per Michael E. Vigil, Chief Judge (J. Miles Hanisee, Judge, and Stephen G. French, Judge, concurring): The decision to affirm the District Court's ruling was based on the absence of a memorandum opposing the proposed summary disposition. Since no opposing memorandum was filed and the time for doing so expired, the court proposed summary affirmance for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed summary disposition (para 1).
 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.