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 pro se from a district court's order of dismissal with prejudice regarding her case against the Defendant. The appeal was based on the Plaintiff's objection to the district court's decision, which she filed after the order of dismissal was issued.

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, August 27, 2010: Order of dismissal with prejudice.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Expressed frustration regarding delays in the case and urged the Court to consider highlighted matters on her original list of evidence.
• Defendant: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of finality due to the absence of a written order ruling on Plaintiff’s post-judgment motion.

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed for lack of finality.

Reasons

• Per Roderick T. Kennedy, J. (James J. Wechsler, J., and Jonathan B. Sutin, J., concurring): The Court was not persuaded by the Plaintiff's arguments against the notice of proposed summary disposition. The Court identified the Plaintiff's "objection to order of dismissal" as akin to a motion for reconsideration. Since the district court had not entered a written order on the Plaintiff's post-judgment motion, the appeal was deemed premature. The Court referenced Grygorwicz v. Trujillo and Dickens v. Laurel Healthcare, LLC to support its decision, emphasizing that the time for filing an appeal does not begin until the district court has made an express disposition of any post-judgment motions, and that resolution of such motions could alter or moot the order being challenged, rendering the appeal premature.