Corse v. Bailey

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Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum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 GARY RAY CORSE,
3 Plaintiff-Appellant,
4 v. NO. A-1-CA-37534
5 MEGAN BAILEY,
6 Defendant-Appellee.
7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY
8 Carl J. Butkus, District Judge
9 Gary Ray Corse
10 Albuquerque, NM
11 Pro Se Appellant
12 Megan Bailey
13 Philadelphia, PA
14 Pro Se Appellee
15 MEMORANDUM OPINION
16 VANZI, Judge.
17 {1} Plaintiff, who is self-represented, appeals from a district court order dismissing
18 his on-the-record appeal from metropolitan court on the ground that he failed to file
1 a statement of issues. We issued a calendar notice proposing to affirm. Plaintiff has
2 responded with a memorandum in opposition. Not persuaded, we affirm.
3 {2} Our calendar notice proposed to hold that, because Plaintiff failed to file any
4 issues in the district court, he has abandoned issues that could have been raised in this
5 Court. See State v. Vigil, 2014-NMCA-096, ¶ 18, 336 P.3d 380. Plaintiff argues that
6 he was prevented by the district court from filing things below. This assertion is not
7 supported by the record, at least with respect to the filing of a statement of issues. To
8 the contrary, the district court extended the time for filing the statement of issues and
9 instructed Plaintiff that the appeal would be dismissed unless he met the new deadline.
10 [RP 182-83] To the extent that Plaintiff believed that court staff was preventing him
11 from making the requisite filing, he had an obligation to create a record on the matter.
12 See Dillard v. Dillard, 1986-NMCA-088, ¶¶ 6-7, 104 N.M. 763, 727 P.2d 7113 (observing that it is the duty of the appellant to provide a record adequate to review
14 the issues on appeal). Because he did not do so, we affirm.
15 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED.
16 __________________________________
17 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge
18 WE CONCUR:
19 _________________________________
20 JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge
2
1 _________________________________
2 KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge
3