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, a self-represented litigant, owns property through which an access road runs. The district court issued a final judgment enjoining the Plaintiff from interfering with or obstructing travel on this access road. The Plaintiff appealed this decision, challenging the district court's jurisdiction, the constitutionality of its orders, and the sufficiency of the evidence among other issues.

Procedural History

• District Court of Mora County, Maria E. Sanchez-Gagne, District Court Judge: Final judgment enjoining Plaintiff from interfering with or obstructing travel on an access road located on her property.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that New Mexico law does not apply to her as a "living, breathing woman on the land," challenged the district court's jurisdiction and constitutionality of its orders, and claimed violations of her rights and due process. She also contended that the district court's actions were unconstitutional, thus rendering its final order and judgment unlawful, null, and void.
• Defendant: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in enjoining the Plaintiff from obstructing the access road on her property.
• Whether the district court had constitutional jurisdiction over the Plaintiff.
• Whether the district court's orders violated the Plaintiff's rights and due process.
• Whether the district court erred in denying the Plaintiff's motions and in its handling of evidence and testimony at trial.

Disposition

• The New Mexico Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s final judgment enjoining the Plaintiff from interfering with or obstructing travel on the access road located on her property.

Reasons

• Per Yohalem, J. (Attrep, C.J., and Wray, J., concurring):
  The Court found no merit in the Plaintiff's assertion that New Mexico law does not apply to her, noting the absence of authority to support such a proposition (para 2).
  The Court addressed the Plaintiff's challenges to the district court's order, finding that she provided no new facts or citation to New Mexico authority to demonstrate error (para 3).
  The Court rejected the Plaintiff's arguments regarding constitutional due process violations, jurisdictional issues, and the sufficiency of evidence, noting her failure to present any citations to authority to support her contentions (paras 4, 6, 9-11).
  The Court was unpersuaded by the Plaintiff's claim that the district court denied her the ability to file pleadings, issue a closing argument, and present her defense at trial, due to her failure to demonstrate how these actions resulted in prejudice (paras 5, 8).
  The Court concluded that the Plaintiff's arguments, including those regarding the district court judge's surety bond and the actions of a prior, recused judge, were unsupported by authority or facts demonstrating error or prejudice (paras 12-13).