AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Downer v. NM Corrections Dep't (AI Generated Opinion Summaries)

Collection AI Generated Opinion Summaries
Date 03/14/2011
Docket Numbers 30,839
Relations See full-text opinion - Downer v. NM Corrections Dep't - 03/14/2011 - Unreported Opinions
Citations - New Mexico Laws and Court Rules
Chapter 41 - Torts - cited by 2,168 documents

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 Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The specifics of the events leading to these claims are not detailed in the provided text.

Procedural History

  • [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

  • Plaintiff-Appellant: Argued that the Defendant was not immune under the Tort Claims Act because the conduct alleged fell within an exception for liability arising from the negligence of public employees licensed or permitted by law to provide health care services while acting within the scope of their duties.
  • Defendant-Appellee: The specific arguments made by the Defendant-Appellee are not detailed in the provided text.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the Defendant is immune under the Tort Claims Act for the Plaintiff's claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Disposition

  • The Court of Appeals affirmed the order dismissing the Plaintiff's complaint for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Reasons

  • Per Michael E. Vigil, J. (Cynthia A. Fry, J., and Timothy L. Garcia, J., concurring): The Court considered the Plaintiff's argument regarding the Defendant's immunity under the Tort Claims Act. The Plaintiff contended that the Defendant's alleged conduct fell within an exception to immunity provided by NMSA 1978, Section 41-4-10. However, the Court declined to address this argument on the grounds that it appeared not to have been preserved for appeal, as the Plaintiff did not demonstrate that this issue was raised in the district court, and the record supported this conclusion. The Court's decision to affirm the dismissal of the Plaintiff's complaint was based on the reasons stated in their notice of proposed summary disposition and the lack of preservation of the Plaintiff's argument regarding the Tort Claims Act's exception.
 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.