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 filed a complaint under the New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) against the City of Truth or Consequences. The district court dismissed Count 1 of her complaint, leading to this appeal (para 1).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant: Asserts that the district court erred by dismissing Count 1 of her complaint brought under the New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act (para 1).
• Defendant-Appellee: The specific arguments of the Defendant-Appellee are not detailed in the provided text.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in dismissing Count 1 of the Plaintiff's complaint under the New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to dismiss Count 1 of the Plaintiff's complaint (para 3).

Reasons

• Per ATTREP, J. (BOGARDUS and HENDERSON, JJ., concurring): The Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition to the proposed summary affirmance did not present any new facts, laws, or arguments that could persuade the Court that the notice of proposed disposition was erroneous. The Plaintiff failed to demonstrate error on appeal, and the burden was on the appellant to clearly show that the trial court had erred. The appellate court concluded that the Plaintiff did not meet this burden, affirming the trial court's dismissal of Count 1 of her complaint (paras 1-3).