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 an appeal by Chuck Hardgrave and Melissa Hardgrave, a married couple, against the Cloud Country West Units Two and Three Property Owners Association. The specific events leading to the appeal are not detailed in the provided text.

Procedural History

• District Court of Otero County: The lower court's decision favored the Cloud Country West Units Two and Three Property Owners Association. The specifics of the lower court's holding are not provided in the text.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (Cloud Country West Units Two and Three Property Owners Association): Supported the proposed summary disposition by the Court of Appeals, indicating agreement with the reasons set out by the court for affirming the district court's decision (para 1).
• Defendants-Appellants (Chuck Hardgrave and Melissa Hardgrave): Did not file a memorandum in opposition to the proposed summary disposition, which under the court's rules, constitutes acceptance of the disposition proposed (para 2).

Legal Issues

• (N/A) The specific legal issues considered by the Court of Appeals are not detailed in the provided text.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the District Court of Otero County in favor of the Cloud Country West Units Two and Three Property Owners Association (para 2).

Reasons

• Per Julie J. Vargas, J., with J. Miles Hanisee, Chief Judge, and Kristina Bogardus, Judge, concurring:
  The decision to affirm the district court was based on the procedural posture of the appeal, specifically the Appellee's support for the proposed summary disposition and the Appellants' failure to file a memorandum in opposition. This failure is interpreted under the court's rules as acceptance of the proposed disposition, citing Frick v. Veazey as precedent for this approach (paras 1-2).