Olson v. Olson
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 Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions.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 MISTY OLSON, 3 Petitioner-Appellant, 4 v. NO. 35,707 5 SCOTT OLSON, 6 Respondent-Appellee. 7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANDOVAL COUNTY 8 Cheryl H. Johnston, District Judge 9 Atler Law Firm, P.C. 10 Timothy J. Atler 11 Albuquerque, NM 12 Roybal-Mack & Cordova, P.C. 13 Antonia Roybal-Mack 14 Albuquerque, NM 15 for Appellant 16 17 18 19 Frazier Law Office William E. Frazier Crystal E. Lees Albuquerque, NM 20 for Appellee 1 MEMORANDUM OPINION 2 VANZI, Chief Judge. 3 {1} Petitioner appeals from the district court’s order adopting the child support 4 hearing officer’s report and recommendations. This Court issued a notice of proposed 5 disposition in which we proposed to reverse the district court’s order. A memorandum 6 in support of our proposed summary disposition was filed by Petitioner. However, no 7 memorandum opposing summary reversal has been filed, and the time for doing so 8 has expired. See Hennessy v. Duryea, 1998-NMCA-036, ¶ 24, 124 N.M. 754, 955 9 P.2d 683 (“Our courts have repeatedly held that, in summary calendar cases, the 10 burden is on the party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in 11 fact or law.”). 12 {2} Accordingly, for the reasons stated in this Court’s notice of proposed 13 disposition, we reverse and remand for further proceedings in compliance with Rule 14 1-053.2 NMRA and Buffington v. McGorty, 2004-NMCA-092, 136 N.M. 226, 96 P.3d 15 787, to sufficiently establish the basis for the district court’s actions. 16 17 18 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. __________________________________ LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge 2 1 WE CONCUR: 2 _________________________________ 3 M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge 4 _________________________________ 5 J. MILES HANISEE, Judge 3
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.
