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 Plaintiff, in a self-represented capacity, filed a complaint against the Defendants, Mike Mellinger and Sabroso Restaurant, seeking relief under the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA). The Plaintiff had previously filed a complaint with an administrative agency other than the Human Rights Commission but did not complete the NMHRA's required administrative process before bringing the action to district court (para 3).

Procedural History

• District Court of Taos County, Sarah C. Backus, District Judge: Dismissed the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that he had filed a complaint with an administrative agency other than the Human Rights Commission and implied that this should suffice for jurisdictional purposes in district court (para 3).
• Defendants: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court has jurisdiction over a NMHRA matter when the Plaintiff has not exhausted the administrative remedies available under the NMHRA (para 2-3).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order dismissing the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice (para 4).

Reasons

• Per JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge (JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge, M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge concurring): The Court held that under the NMHRA, a plaintiff must first exhaust administrative remedies before bringing an action in district court. The Court noted that the Plaintiff did not complete the required administrative process through the Human Rights Commission, which is a prerequisite for the district court to have jurisdiction over a NMHRA matter. The Plaintiff's filing of a complaint with an administrative agency other than the Human Rights Commission did not satisfy the NMHRA's requirements for exhausting administrative remedies. Therefore, the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction (paras 2-4).