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 concerns a dispute over the timeliness of a petition for a certificate of redemption filed by the Petitioner regarding a property purchased at a foreclosure sale. The trial court's order approving the sale, dated March 5, 2003, specified a one-month redemption period. The Petitioner filed the petition on April 7, 2003, which was contested by the Purchasers as untimely, arguing it should have been filed by April 4, 2003 (paras 1-2).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: The trial court dismissed the petition for a certificate of redemption, holding that it was not timely filed (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant: Argued that the one-month redemption period should be calculated as a full calendar month, ending on April 5, 2003, and that the petition filed on April 7, 2003, was timely because April 5 fell on a Saturday (paras 1, 3).
• Purchasers-Appellees: Contended that the redemption period expired on April 4, 2003, and the petition filed on April 7, 2003, was untimely (paras 2-3).

Legal Issues

• How should a one-month redemption period be calculated under New Mexico law?
• Does the redemption period end on the corresponding date in the subsequent month or the day before that date?
• Was the petition for a certificate of redemption filed on April 7, 2003, timely?

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, holding that the petition for a certificate of redemption was timely filed (para 8).

Reasons

Per Kennedy J. (Bustamante and Robinson JJ. concurring):

• The Court determined that a "calendar month" should be calculated from the date of the court order triggering the redemption period to the corresponding date in the subsequent month. This interpretation aligns with NMSA 1978, § 12-2A-7(C) (1997), which, while not controlling in this case, reflects legislative intent and good policy (paras 5-6).
• Rule 1-006(A) NMRA 2003, which excludes the day of the triggering event from the computation of time, supports this method of calculation. Thus, the one-month redemption period in this case extended to April 5, 2003 (para 6).
• The Court emphasized that this approach is consistent with common understanding and avoids forfeitures, which are disfavored in law. Most individuals would reasonably expect a one-month period starting on March 5 to end on April 5, not April 4 (para 7).
• Since April 5, 2003, was a Saturday, the petition filed on Monday, April 7, 2003, was timely under Rule 1-006(A), which excludes weekends and holidays when the last day of a period falls on such days (para 6).
• The Court reversed the trial court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings, directing the trial court to consider the petition as timely (para 8).