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 Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants engaged in tortious interference with a contract. The specific events leading to the claim are not detailed in the decision.

Procedural History

• District Court, Sandoval County: The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants, Leigh Angellis and Ambercare Hospice, Inc.

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant: Argued that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard to the claim of tortious interference with a contract.
• Defendants-Appellees (Leigh Angellis and Ambercare Hospice, Inc.): Did not file a response to the appellate court's notice of proposed summary disposition.

Legal Issues

• Did the district court apply the correct legal standard to the Plaintiff's claim of tortious interference with a contract?

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Reasons

Per Vigil J. (Sutin and Robles JJ. concurring):

The Court of Appeals found that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard to the Plaintiff's claim of tortious interference with a contract. The appellate court issued a notice of proposed summary disposition, suggesting reversal and remand for the district court to apply the proper standard as articulated in Zarr v. Washington Tru Solutions, LLC, 2009-NMCA-050, ¶ 11, 146 N.M. 274, 208 P.3d 919. The Defendants failed to file a memorandum in opposition to the proposed disposition, which constitutes acceptance of the appellate court's proposal under Frick v. Veazey, 116 N.M. 246, 247, 861 P.2d 287, 288 (Ct. App. 1993). Consequently, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for the district court to apply the correct legal standard. (headnotes)