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 appealed from a district court order that granted the Defendant, the City of Albuquerque, a motion for summary judgment. The appeal centered around the Plaintiff's contention that her work releases, specifically a doctor's note indicating her ability to work in the police department, were submitted to the City and met the City's requirements for such documentation.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: The court granted the City's motion for summary judgment.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that one of the doctor’s notes submitted was an exact duplicate, represented the notice that she could work in the police department, and was real as it was delivered to the City.
• Defendant (City of Albuquerque): Supported the district court's decision to grant summary judgment, contending that the Plaintiff's work releases were not submitted to the City and were not the type of information required by the City.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the Defendant by determining that the Plaintiff's work releases were not submitted to the City and did not meet the City's requirements.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order granting the Defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Reasons

• Megan P. Duffy, J., with Jacqueline R. Medina, J., and Shammara H. Henderson, J., concurring, found that the Plaintiff did not engage with the district court’s determinations regarding the submission and adequacy of her work releases. The Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition did not sufficiently develop or support her assertions that the doctor's note was delivered to the City and met the City's requirements. The Court emphasized that assertions of counsel without support in the record cannot be relied upon and that a party responding to a summary calendar notice must specifically point out errors of law and fact. The repetition of earlier arguments without further development does not fulfill this requirement (paras 1-4).