Cach, LLC v. Riley

This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. 1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 2 CACH, LLC, 3 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/Appellee, 4 v. No. 32,931 5 DAVID W. RILEY, 6 Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff/Appellant 7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 8 Denise Barela Shepherd, District Judge 9 Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, 10 Harris & Sisk, P.A. 11 Jennifer G. Anderson 12 Emil J. Kiehne 13 Albuquerque, NM 14 Kanter & Grubesic, P.A. 15 Dana K. Grubesic 16 Albuquerque, NM 17 for Appellee 18 Law Offices of Roger Moore 19 Roger Moore 20 Albuquerque, NM 1 for Appellant 2 MEMORANDUM OPINION 3 BUSTAMANTE, Judge. 4 {1} Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff seeks to appeal from the district court’s order 5 granting his motion for summary judgment due to lack of standing and denying his 6 motion for reconsideration of the court’s ruling on attorney fees related to Plaintiff’s 7 claim. We issued a notice of proposed disposition, proposing to summarily dismiss 8 for lack of a final, appealable order, due to outstanding counterclaims and a lack of 9 certification language that could make the order immediately appealable under Rule 10 1-054(B)(1) NMRA. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant has filed a response to our notice, 11 supporting our proposed summary disposition. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff has not 12 filed a response. “Failure to file a memorandum in opposition constitutes acceptance 13 of the disposition proposed in the calendar notice.” Frick v. Veazey, 14 1993-NMCA-119, ¶ 2, 116 N.M. 246, 861 P.2d 287. We, therefore, summarily 15 dismiss Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff’s appeal for lack of a final, appealable order for 16 the reasons set forth in our notice. 17 {2} IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 2 1 WE CONCUR: 2 3 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 4 5 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 3