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 from a district court order that dismissed his complaint with prejudice as a sanction for his vexatious conduct. The appeal challenges the district court's handling of the case, including the conduct of the judge and the procedural fairness of combining hearings and undisclosed documents.
Procedural History
- District Court of Bernalillo County: Order granting Defendants' motion for dismissal with prejudice due to Plaintiff's vexatious conduct and dismissing Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice.
Parties' Submissions
- Plaintiff-Appellant: Contends that the district court improperly combined two hearings, that Defendants presented undisclosed documents to the judge, that the judge's conduct was rude and disrespectful, and that his civil constitutional rights and due process were violated.
- Defendants-Appellees: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the district court erred in dismissing the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice as a sanction for vexatious conduct.
- Whether the Plaintiff's civil constitutional rights and due process were violated by the district court's actions, including the combining of hearings, the alleged presentation of undisclosed documents to the judge, and the judge's conduct.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order dismissing the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice.
Reasons
-
Per ATTREP, J. (DUFFY, J., and YOHALEM, J., concurring): The Court of Appeals decided to affirm the district court's dismissal of the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice due to the Plaintiff's failure to provide clear arguments or legal authority to support his claims of error on appeal. The Plaintiff did not adequately develop his arguments or indicate how the alleged errors were preserved for review. The Court emphasized that it is not their duty to review undeveloped arguments or to speculate on what the Plaintiff's arguments might be (paras 1-3).
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.