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 The 505 Burgers Company and its owner, Morgan Newsom (collectively, Defendants), who were sued by the Labor Relations Division of the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions (Plaintiff) for damages under the Wage Payment Act. The core of the dispute centers around the statute of limitations for filing the lawsuit, with the Defendants arguing that the lawsuit was filed after the permissible period had expired.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that the statute of limitations for filing the lawsuit had not expired, considering the tolling period during the Department of Workforce Solutions (DWS) investigation of the wage claims.
• Defendants: Contended that the tolling period should not start upon the filing of the wage claim but should instead be triggered when DWS actively investigates the case. They argued that a nineteen-month delay in the investigation should count towards the running of the statute of limitations.

Legal Issues

• Whether the lawsuit was barred under the applicable statute of limitations for enforcing provisions of Chapter 50, Article 4 NMSA 1978.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court judgment awarding Plaintiff damages under the Wage Payment Act.

Reasons

• Zachary A. Ives, Judge, with Kristina Bogardus, Judge, and Jacqueline R. Medina, Judge, concurring, provided the reasoning for the decision. The Court found that the statute of limitations had not expired when the complaint was filed, as the limitations period was tolled during the DWS investigation of the employer. The Defendants' argument that the tolling period should only commence when DWS actively works on the case was rejected. The Court deferred to DWS's interpretation of Section 37-1-5, which begins the tolling period at the time the wage complaint is filed, consistent with statutory construction principles that preclude reading into the statute language that is not present (paras 2-5).