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 parties, a day before their marriage, signed a prenuptial agreement classifying all their respective properties as separate. After approximately seven years of marriage, the Wife filed for divorce, and the district court reserved jurisdiction to determine economic issues post-divorce. Litigation focused on enforcing the prenuptial agreement, the Husband's quantum meruit claim for unpaid legal services provided during the marriage, and a discovery dispute related to an interrogatory response by the Wife (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County, Victor S. Lopez, District Judge: Issued a decree of divorce, reserved jurisdiction to determine economic issues, granted partial summary judgment enforcing the prenuptial agreement, denied Husband's quantum meruit claim, granted Wife's motion for attorney fees, and denied Husband's motion for sanctions (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Wife: Argued for the enforcement of the prenuptial agreement, opposed Husband's quantum meruit claim, and sought attorney fees (paras 3-4, 5).
• Husband: Contended that the prenuptial agreement was unenforceable, claimed quantum meruit for legal services provided during the marriage, sought sanctions against Wife, and appealed the award of attorney fees to Wife (paras 3-4, 5).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred by granting Wife’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding the parties’ prenuptial agreement.
• Whether the district court erred by denying Husband’s quantum meruit claim.
• Whether the district court erred by failing to sanction Wife based on her response to an interrogatory.
• Whether the district court erred by awarding Wife attorney fees and costs (para 6).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's orders granting partial summary judgment in favor of the Wife, enforcing the prenuptial agreement, denying Husband's quantum meruit claim, granting Wife's motion for attorney fees, and denying Husband's motion for sanctions (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per M. Monica Zamora, with Julie J. Vargas and Emil J. Kiehne concurring, held that the prenuptial agreement was unambiguous and enforceable as written, dismissing Husband's defenses including fraud in the inducement. The court found no merit in Husband's quantum meruit claim for legal services, noting the lack of a fee agreement and credible evidence of the services' value. The court also found no abuse of discretion in the district court's denial of Husband's motion for sanctions related to Wife's interrogatory response and upheld the award of attorney fees to Wife based on the prenuptial agreement's provisions. The court rejected Husband's request for reassignment of the district court judge, finding no errors or abuses of discretion by the district court (paras 7-35).