Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

DOOLEY v. QUIET TITLE COMPANY, LLC, 30 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals of New Mexico Number: innmco20120117290 Visitors: 1
Filed: Dec. 09, 2011
Latest Update: Dec. 09, 2011
Summary: 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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. MEMORANDUM OPINION VIGIL, Judge. In this appeal, the Court issued a calendar notice on March 2, 2011, proposing summary affirmance of the district court's order denying Plaintiff HDQ, LLC's motion for prejudgment interest. On March 14, 2011, a notice of automatic stay was filed in this Court, notifying the Court th
More

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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

VIGIL, Judge.

In this appeal, the Court issued a calendar notice on March 2, 2011, proposing summary affirmance of the district court's order denying Plaintiff HDQ, LLC's motion for prejudgment interest. On March 14, 2011, a notice of automatic stay was filed in this Court, notifying the Court that Defendant Quiet Title Company, LLC had filed a petition for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court. On July 20, 2011, this Court entered an order staying this appeal pending the bankruptcy proceedings. On July 18, 2011, and August 22, 2011, the United States Bankruptcy Court entered a stipulated order dismissing the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, and a default order approving modification of the automatic stay, respectively. The parties agree it is appropriate for this Court to lift the stay of the appeal. The parties also agree that this Court should allow Cornelius Dooley and Susan Hoffman-Dooley to be substituted for Plaintiff HDQ, LLC, in this action.

On October 14, 2011, this Court filed an order that lifted the stay of this appeal pending bankruptcy, requested the parties respond to the March 2, 2011, calendar notice, and allowed the substitution of Plaintiff HDQ, LLC for Plaintiffs Cornelius Dooley and Susan Hoffman-Dooley. Defendants have filed a memorandum in support of the calendar notice. The substituted Plaintiffs have filed a response indicating that they have abandoned the appeal and do not opposed the calendar notice analysis.

For the reasons set forth in this Court's March 2, 2011, calendar notice, we affirm the district court's order denying Plaintiff and the substituted Plaintiffs prejudgment interest.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, and LINDA M. VANZI, Judges, concurs.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer