Kruskal v. Martinez

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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 KERRY KRUSKAL, 3 Plaintiff-Appellant, 4 v. No. 35,237 5 JUAN MARTINEZ and DIANA 6 MARTINEZ, husband and wife, 7 Defendants-Appellees. 8 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAOS COUNTY 9 Jeff McElroy, District Judge 10 Kerry Kruskal 11 Arroyo Seco, NM 12 Pro Se Appellant 13 Carol A. Neelley PC 14 Carol A. Neelley 15 Santa Fe, NM 16 for Appellees 17 18 BUSTAMANTE, Judge. MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 {1} Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of 2 proposed disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has been filed, 3 and the time for doing so has expired. 4 {2} Affirmed. 5 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 _______________________________________ MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 9 WE CONCUR: 10 11 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge 12 13 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.