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

• Petitioners, including Eli Sanchez and Patricia C. Trujillo, challenged permits granted by the Board of County Commissioners of Taos County for the construction of a heliport on property owned by Edmund Healy. The construction, part of a series of permitted and unpermitted projects over five years, allegedly interfered with the petitioners' use of a lateral acequia for irrigation. The County and district court decisions focused on whether a lateral is considered an acequia under local regulations and whether petitioners' appeal was timely given the piecemeal nature of the construction and lack of notice (paras 1-3, 5-7).

Procedural History

• District Court of Taos County: Affirmed the County's decision to grant permits for construction, finding the appeal of any permit prior to the final heliport permit untimely (para 3).
• Court of Appeals of the State of New Mexico: Reversed the district court's decision, holding that laterals are considered acequias and remanded for a new hearing regarding all permits issued during the construction (para 4).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioners-Appellants: Argued that the construction interfered with their use of a lateral acequia and that the County's refusal to apply certain land use regulations to protect acequias was incorrect. They also contended that their appeal was timely due to the piecemeal nature of the construction and lack of notice (paras 1-3).
• Respondent-Appellee (Board of County Commissioners of Taos County): Maintained that the regulation requiring acequia commission permission for construction only applied to acequia madres, not laterals, and that the appeal of permits prior to the final heliport permit was untimely (paras 2-3).
• Intervenor/Respondent-Appellee (Edmund Healy): Supported the County's interpretation of the regulations and argued against the timeliness of the petitioners' appeal.

Legal Issues

• Whether a lateral is also considered an acequia under the Taos, N.M., Land Use Regulations (LUR) (para 4).
• Whether there were unusual circumstances which excused the untimely appeal by Petitioners (para 4).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's decision, holding that laterals are considered acequias and remanded the case for a new hearing regarding all permits issued (para 4).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Henderson, J., with Hanisee, C.J., and Yohalem, J., concurring, found that the district court erred in determining that laterals are not intended to be considered acequias under the LUR. The court concluded that laterals are subject to the same protections as acequias, requiring express permission from the acequia commission prior to disturbance by construction. The court also held that the piecemeal nature of the construction and lack of notice to petitioners created unusual circumstances that excused their untimely appeal. The case was remanded to the County to hold a new hearing regarding all permits issued during the course of construction, consistent with the court's opinion (paras 22-42).