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, a corrections officer employed by the City of Gallup, was injured during a training exercise on February 20, 1986, in the course of her employment. She initially filed a workers' compensation claim against the City of Gallup and was awarded compensation. Subsequently, she filed a lawsuit against various defendants, including the McKinley County Board of Commissioners, the McKinley County Sheriff's Department, and individual employees, alleging liability under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act (paras 3-4).
Procedural History
- Trial Court: Granted summary judgment in favor of the McKinley County Board of Commissioners and the McKinley County Sheriff's Department, finding that the Plaintiff failed to comply with the ninety-day notice requirement under Section 41-4-16 of the Tort Claims Act and failed to file the lawsuit within the two-year statute of limitations under Section 41-4-15 (paras 5, 11-12).
Parties' Submissions
- Plaintiff-Appellant: Argued that the Defendants failed to meet their burden of proving lack of notice under Section 41-4-16, and that the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations. She also contended that the trial court's delay in ruling on the summary judgment motion should have resulted in a deemed denial under procedural rules, although this argument was abandoned on appeal (paras 1, 7, 13).
- Defendants-Appellees: Asserted that the Plaintiff failed to provide the required ninety-day notice under Section 41-4-16 and did not file the lawsuit within the two-year statute of limitations. They also argued that the procedural rules for computing time did not apply to the Tort Claims Act (paras 5, 8, 15-16).
Legal Issues
- Did the Plaintiff comply with the ninety-day notice requirement under Section 41-4-16 of the Tort Claims Act?
- Was the Plaintiff's lawsuit filed within the two-year statute of limitations under Section 41-4-15 of the Tort Claims Act?
- Does the procedural rule for computing time (SCRA 1986, 1-006) apply to the statute of limitations under the Tort Claims Act?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the McKinley County Board of Commissioners and the McKinley County Sheriff's Department, finding that the Plaintiff failed to comply with the ninety-day notice requirement (para 11).
- The Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment as to Defendant Clayton Garcia, holding that the procedural rule for computing time extended the filing deadline, making the lawsuit timely (para 21).
Reasons
Per Black J. (Minzner and Pickard JJ. concurring):
Notice Requirement: The Court held that the Plaintiff failed to meet the ninety-day notice requirement under Section 41-4-16. The Defendants provided evidence, through an affidavit, that they did not receive timely notice of the claim. The Plaintiff's argument that actual knowledge of the injury by county employees sufficed was rejected, as the statute requires notice of the likelihood of litigation, not just the occurrence of an injury (paras 6-11).
Statute of Limitations: The Court determined that the procedural rule for computing time (SCRA 1986, 1-006) applied to the Tort Claims Act. Since the two-year deadline fell on a Saturday, the rule extended the filing period to the following Monday, making the Plaintiff's lawsuit against Defendant Garcia timely. The Court rejected the Defendants' argument that the statutory computation method under Section 12-2-2(G) should apply, emphasizing that procedural rules govern the calculation of time limits for filing lawsuits (paras 13-21).
Conclusion: The Court affirmed the dismissal of claims against the McKinley County Board of Commissioners and the Sheriff's Department but reversed the dismissal of claims against Defendant Garcia, remanding the case for further proceedings (para 21).