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 case involves a plaintiff appealing a judgment related to damages awarded from an automobile accident. During a bench trial, the district court judge referenced a police report that appeared to contradict the plaintiff's testimony regarding the accident.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred by relying on a police report of the accident, which contradicted his testimony. He also contended that the reference to the police report amounted to plain error.
• Defendant-Appellee: Claimed that the cost of repair of the vehicle exceeded its value, which he claimed was $4,850.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred by relying on a police report of the accident.
• Whether the reference to the police report amounted to plain error.
• Whether the district court's questioning amounted to a violation of Rule 11-614 NMRA.

Disposition

• The appeal was affirmed.

Reasons

• Judges Jennifer L. Attrep, Kristina Bogardus, and Jane B. Yohalem concurred in the decision. The court concluded that the plaintiff did not establish plain error regarding the district court's reference to the police report, as the plaintiff had listed the report on his exhibit list, thereby inviting any alleged error (para 4). Furthermore, the court found that the plaintiff failed to prove actual damage to the vehicle as required, and the district court's decision was rational based on the evidence presented (paras 5-6). Lastly, the court deemed the issue regarding the district court's questioning as abandoned since the plaintiff provided no new argument against the proposed affirmation on this issue (para 7).