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 arose from delays and issues in the preparation of a transcript required for an appeal. The appellant's counsel faced difficulties obtaining a complete and accurate transcript from a court reporter who was no longer employed by the judiciary. Despite repeated efforts, the transcript was delayed and, when received, was riddled with errors, rendering it nearly unintelligible. The appellant and opposing counsel planned to stipulate corrections to the transcript to proceed with the appeal (paras 2-3).
Procedural History
- District Court of Bernalillo County: The trial court issued a decision, but the details of the holding are not provided in the decision to analyze.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Educational Assessments Systems, Inc.): Argued that the delay in filing the brief-in-chief was due to the incomplete and inaccurate transcript, which was beyond their control. They detailed their efforts to obtain the transcript and proposed a stipulation with opposing counsel to address the errors (paras 2-3).
- Appellees (Cooperative Educational Services of New Mexico, Inc. and Max Luft): Did not object to the delay, did not move to dismiss the appeal, and appeared to have suffered no prejudice from the delay (para 4).
Legal Issues
- Whether the appeal should be dismissed for failure to timely file the brief-in-chief (para 2).
- What measures should be taken to address delays and inaccuracies in transcript preparation in appellate proceedings (paras 5-10).
Disposition
- The court declined to dismiss the appeal and set deadlines for filing the stipulation and the appellant's brief-in-chief (para 11).
Reasons
Per Hartz J. (Minzner and Chavez JJ. concurring):
The court emphasized the responsibility of appellate counsel to ensure timely filing of transcripts and compliance with appellate rules. It acknowledged the appellant's efforts to obtain the transcript and the lack of prejudice to the appellees. The court decided not to dismiss the appeal but warned that future non-compliance with rules would result in sanctions, including potential dismissal, fines, or refusal to consider certain contentions. The court outlined the relevant rules for addressing delays and inaccuracies in transcript preparation, including seeking extensions, objecting to inaccuracies, and involving the court when court reporters are uncooperative. The court set deadlines for the stipulation and the appellant's brief-in-chief to proceed with the appeal (paras 1-11).