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 lawsuit originated from a dispute over the use of assets by the manager of BUKE, LLC, a car dealership, who was also a member of BUKE and of defendant LLC car dealerships. The manager used BUKE's assets for the benefit of the defendant dealerships without the alleged necessary consent from BUKE's members. The case also involved a claim against an accountant and his firm for malpractice related to their services to BUKE and the defendant dealerships (paras 1, 3-4, 12-13).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Ted Baca, District Judge: Summary judgment rulings in favor of Defendant LLC car dealerships and their members, and dismissal of the accountant malpractice claim against the Accountants. BUKE's motion to amend the scheduling order was also denied.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant (BUKE, LLC): Argued that the manager did not have the necessary consent to use BUKE's assets for the benefit of the defendant dealerships and that the accountant committed malpractice in his services to BUKE.
• Defendants-Appellees (Cross Country Auto Sales, LLC; Cross Country Auto Sales Westside, LLC; Southwest Auto Wholesale, LLC; CAS, LLC; John Chiado; Joe Chiado; John T. Reilly; BEDO, LLC; John Perner; and Perner and Michnovicz, LLC): Contended that the manager had the requisite consent to use the assets in question and that there was no evidence to support BUKE's claims against them, including the accountant malpractice claim.

Legal Issues

• Whether the manager had the necessary consent to use BUKE's assets for the benefit of the defendant dealerships.
• Whether the accountant committed malpractice in his services to BUKE.
• Whether BUKE should be allowed to amend the scheduling order to designate an expert witness for its accounting malpractice claim (paras 22, 49, 59).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s summary judgment rulings in favor of Defendant LLC car dealerships and their members.
• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s entry of summary judgment dismissing the accountant malpractice claim.
• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of BUKE’s motion to amend the scheduling order.

Reasons

• LINDA M. VANZI, Judge (RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Chief Judge, JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge concurring): The Court found that the undisputed material facts indicated that the manager had the necessary consent from a majority of BUKE's members to use the assets in question, thus negating BUKE's claims against the defendant dealerships and their members. Regarding the accountant malpractice claim, the Court determined that expert testimony was necessary to establish a breach of the standard of care, which BUKE failed to provide. The Court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying BUKE's motion to amend the scheduling order, as BUKE had ample time to designate an expert witness but failed to do so (paras 22-44, 49-58, 59-65).