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 Defendant appealed a district court's final judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, arguing that the court failed to provide necessary accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which allegedly hindered his ability to present his case effectively at trial (paras 1-2).
Procedural History
- District Court of Taos County: Entered final judgment in favor of the Plaintiff (para 1).
Parties' Submissions
- Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred by not providing ADA accommodations, which affected his trial presentation. He also claimed the court failed to provide official hearing records and prevented him from presenting evidence at trial (paras 1, 4).
- Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the district court erred by failing to provide ADA accommodations to the Defendant.
- Whether the district court erred by not providing official hearing records to the Defendant.
- Whether the district court erred by preventing the Defendant from presenting evidence at trial.
Disposition
- The appeal was denied, and the district court's judgment was affirmed (para 6).
Reasons
Per Baca J. (Attrep and Ives JJ. concurring):
The court found that the Defendant did not preserve his ADA accommodation request for appeal, as there was no record of such a request being made before the district court's final judgment. The Defendant's new evidence, including email correspondence, was not part of the record and could not be considered on appeal. The court also determined that the Defendant failed to preserve his argument regarding the lack of official hearing records, as there was no indication he raised this issue with the district court. Additionally, the court found no error in the district court's handling of evidence presentation, as the Defendant did not demonstrate what additional evidence he was prevented from presenting or that he alerted the court to any such issue during the trial (paras 2-5).