A Lujan v. P Riddle
A Lujan v. P Riddle
A Lujan v. P Riddle
Opinion
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
2 LAWRENCE ORTEGA AND ROSALIE ORTEGA, 4 Plaintiffs, and ARABELLA LUJAN, VINCENT LUJAN, CECILIA GONZALES, AND JOSE ANTONIO GONZALES, 9 Interveners-Appellants, v. NO. 29,180 PRISCILLA RIDDLE, 12 Defendant-Appellee.
13 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAOS COUNTY Abigail Aragon, District Judge
15 The Herrera Firm, P.C.
16 Samuel M. Herrera Taos, NM for Appellants Rudy Martin Espanola, NM for Appellee 22 MEMORANDUM OPINION KENNEDY, Judge.
2 Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has been filed and the time for doing so has expired.
5 AFFIRMED.
7 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge
8 WE CONCUR:
10 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge
12 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.