Moya v. Bd. Of County Commissioners ( 2011 )

1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please 2 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 3 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated 4 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does 5 not include the filing date. 6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 7 CLAUDIO MOYA, NORA MOYA, FIDEL 8 VALLEJOS, TONY A. CHAVEZ, HERMAN 9 MIRELES, GLORIA ASKEN, ELIZABETH 10 DIAZ, JAMES BARELA, MANUEL OTERO, 11 DEMETRIO CHAVEZ, ESTHER MARTINEZ, 12 EDDIE AYON, HERMAN CHAVEZ, 13 CHRISTOPHER HIGGINS, PATRICK BACA, 14 MELISSA J. SANCHEZ, LYDIA A. PIRO, 15 CHRIS L. MONTOYA, MICHELLE BACA, 16 SANDRA L. MONTOYA, MICHELLE GONZALES, 17 JOANN M. CHAVEZ, PHILIP BACA, DUSTIN 18 ARMSTRONG, JOSE M. TRILLO, PAUL 19 GONZALES, CLOVIS TORRES, REGINA 20 CHAVEZ, MARY MOYA, YVETTE 21 GONZALES, RICKI ARMSTRONG, 22 REUBEN CHAVEZ, JULIA GALLEGOS, 23 PETE GALLEGOS, EARL C. GLEASON, 24 and DARLA K. GLEASON, 25 Plaintiffs-Appellants, 26 v. NO. 30,877 27 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 28 OF VALENCIA COUNTY and VALENCIA 29 HEALTH COMMONS, a New Mexico 30 corporation, 31 Defendants-Appellees. 32 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF VALENCIA COUNTY 33 George P. Eichwald, District Judge 2 1 James Lawrence Sánchez Trial Lawyer, PC 2 James Lawrence Sánchez 3 Belen, NM 4 for Appellant 5 Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk, P.A. 6 Arthur D. Melendres 7 Zachary L. McCormick 8 Albuquerque, NM 9 for Appellee Board of County Commissioners of Valencia County 10 Sanchez, Mowrer & Desiderio, P.C. 11 Robert J. Desiderio 12 Albuquerque, NM 13 for Appellee Valencia Health Commons 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION 15 VIGIL, Judge. 16 Plaintiffs are local residents and taxpayers of Valencia County. Although 17 Defendant Board of County Commissioners of Valencia County (the Board) and 18 Defendant Valencia Health Commons (Health Commons) (collectively, Defendants) 19 argued for dismissal on more than one ground [RP 96, 109, 126, 192], the order of 20 dismissal was entered on the sole basis that Plaintiffs lack standing to bring this 21 action. [RP 227] Plaintiffs contend that they have standing as local residents and 22 property taxpayers to challenge the Board’s recent payment of $30,000 to Health 23 Commons to extend the contract to build a new hospital and emergency room in 3 1 Valencia County that previously had been authorized by Valencia County voters. [DS 2 6-7] Plaintiffs also contend that standing should be conferred upon them by the 3 “Great Public Importance Doctrine.” [DS 8-10] 4 This Court’s calendar notice proposed to affirm the district court’s order of 5 dismissal. [Ct. App. File, CN1] The Board has filed a memorandum in support of 6 the proposed disposition. [Ct. App. File, MIS] Plaintiffs have not responded to the 7 calendar notice, and the time for doing so has passed. For the reasons set forth in the 8 calendar notice, we affirm the district court’s order of dismissal. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 _________________________ 11 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge 12 WE CONCUR: 13 _________________________________ 14 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Judge 15 _________________________________ 16 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge 4