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

• Defendant Alfonso Archuleta, representing himself, appealed from a district court order that denied his motion to set aside a judgment related to Defendant Quick Care, LLC. The appeal also referenced a previous order denying his motion to intervene, which became moot following a settlement and a stipulated order of dismissal with prejudice.

Procedural History

• District Court of Doña Ana County, January 30, 2014: Denied Defendant Archuleta's motion to intervene as he was already a party in the case (para 2).
• District Court of Doña Ana County, September 22, 2015: Denied Defendant Archuleta's motion to set aside the original judgment under Rule 1-060(B) NMRA (para 3).

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant Alfonso Archuleta: Argued for the setting aside of the judgment as applied to Defendant Quick Care, LLC, and attempted to represent Quick Care, LLC, in his pro se capacity (para 3).
• Plaintiff-Appellee (Community 1st Bank Las Vegas): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court properly denied Defendant Archuleta's motion to set aside the original judgment under Rule 1-060(B) NMRA (para 3).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of Defendant Archuleta's motion to set aside the judgment (para 4).

Reasons

• Per Jonathan B. Sutin, with Michael D. Bustamante and Stephen G. French concurring, the Court of Appeals held that the district court properly denied the motion on the grounds that Defendant Archuleta could not represent Defendant Quick Care, LLC, in a pro se capacity, citing LR3-202(B) NMRA and NMSA 1978, § 36-2-27 (1999) against the unauthorized practice of law. The Court concluded that Defendant Archuleta's memorandum in opposition did not establish any error in the district court's decision (paras 1-4).