1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.

3 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.

6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

7 ITALIGREE INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Texas limited liability Company, 9 Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NO. 30,436 JETHRO CHAPPELLE; JETHRO CHAPPELLE, JR., 13 Defendants-Appellants.

14 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANDOVAL COUNTY George P. Eichwald, District Judge Brad L. Hays Rio Rancho, NM for Appellee Jethro Chappelle New York, NY Pro se Appellant

22 MEMORANDUM OPINION CASTILLO, Judge.

2 Defendant appeals the district court’s order dismissing Defendant’s pleadings and finding that it lacked jurisdiction over the matter. In our calendar notice, we explained that Defendant had previously appealed from the default judgment entered by the district court, and that case ended in dismissal when we issued our memorandum opinion. [RP 133] Our decision to dismiss the previous appeal became the “law of the case,” and the district court no longer has jurisdiction over the case.

8 See State of N.M. ex rel. Gary K. King v. UU Bar Ranch Ltd. P’ship, 2009-NMSC- 010, ¶ 22, 145 N.M. 769, 205 P.3d 816 (citation omitted). Defendant does not challenge our explanation regarding the “law of the case” doctrine. See State v. Hearne, 112 N.M. 208, 214, 813 P.2d 485, 491 (Ct. App. 1991) (pointing out that when facts are undisputed and application of legal principles is clear, case is appropriately decided on summary calendar); see also Hennessy v. Duryea, 1998-NMCA-036, ¶ 24, 124 N.M. 754, 955 P.2d 683 (“Our courts have repeatedly held that, in summary calendar cases, the burden is on the party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law.”).

17 Therefore, for the reasons set out in this opinion and those included in our calendar notice, we dismiss Defendant’s appeal.

19 IT IS SO ORDERED.

1 ___________________________________ 2 CELIA FOY CASTILLO, Judge WE CONCUR:

4 __________________________________ MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge

6 __________________________________ RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge