Century Bank v. Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC; Andrew C. Rose; Ann S. Copeland

D. New Mexico

Century Bank v. Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC; Andrew C. Rose; Ann S. Copeland

District Court, D. New Mexico·Decided July 20, 2026·No. 1:24-cv-01027·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO _______________________

CENTURY BANK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:24-cv-01027-MLG-JHR

ART FINANCE FUNDING (IX), LLC, ANDREW C. ROSE, and ANN S. COPELAND,

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF CENTURY BANK’S APPLICATION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS

On November 26, 2025, the Court—pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B) and (b)(3), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(D), and Quint v. Vail Resorts, Inc., 89 F.4th 803, 807-09 (10th Cir. 2023)—referred Plaintiff Century Bank’s Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Doc. 24, to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jerry H. Ritter for review. See Doc. 27. Judge Ritter filed a Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (“PFRD”) on February 3, 2026, recommending the Court grant in part Century Bank’s application and award $21,415.40 in attorneys’ fees and costs against Defendants Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC and Andrew C. Rose. Doc. 31 at 1. The PFRD notified the parties of their ability to file written objections within fourteen days and that failure to do so waived appellate review. Id. at 5 (citing § 636(b)(1)). As of the date of the entry of this Order, no objections have been filed by either party. The Court finds no reason either in law or fact to depart from Judge Ritter’s recommendations and will adopt the conclusions memorialized in the PFRD. Doc. 31. It is therefore ordered as follows: 1. Judge Ritter’s Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, Doc. 31, is adopted; 2. Century Bank’s Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Doc. 24, is granted in part. 3. Century Bank is awarded $21,415.30 in attorneys’ fees, costs, and taxes against Defendants Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC and Andrew C. Rose, jointly and severally.

} ? J y ff e lL □□□ a. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE MATTHEW L. GARCIA

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO _______________________

CENTURY BANK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:24-cv-01027-MLG-JHR

ART FINANCE FUNDING (IX), LLC, ANDREW C. ROSE, and ANN S. COPELAND,

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF CENTURY BANK’S APPLICATION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS

On November 26, 2025, the Court—pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B) and (b)(3), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(D), and Quint v. Vail Resorts, Inc., 89 F.4th 803, 807-09 (10th Cir. 2023)—referred Plaintiff Century Bank’s Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Doc. 24, to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jerry H. Ritter for review. See Doc. 27. Judge Ritter filed a Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (“PFRD”) on February 3, 2026, recommending the Court grant in part Century Bank’s application and award $21,415.40 in attorneys’ fees and costs against Defendants Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC and Andrew C. Rose. Doc. 31 at 1. The PFRD notified the parties of their ability to file written objections within fourteen days and that failure to do so waived appellate review. Id. at 5 (citing § 636(b)(1)). As of the date of the entry of this Order, no objections have been filed by either party. The Court finds no reason either in law or fact to depart from Judge Ritter’s recommendations and will adopt the conclusions memorialized in the PFRD. Doc. 31. It is therefore ordered as follows: 1. Judge Ritter’s Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, Doc. 31, is adopted; 2. Century Bank’s Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, Doc. 24, is granted in part. 3. Century Bank is awarded $21,415.30 in attorneys’ fees, costs, and taxes against Defendants Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC and Andrew C. Rose, jointly and severally.

} ? J y ff e lL □□□ a. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE MATTHEW L. GARCIA

Century Bank v. Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC; Andrew C. Rose; Ann S. Copeland, (D.N.M. 2026).

Pincite

Century Bank v. Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC; Andrew C. Rose; Ann S. Copeland (Century Bank v. Art Finance Funding (IX), LLC; Andrew C. Rose; Ann S. Copeland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related