Wells Fargo Bank v. Russo

• Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals
• Decided: September 22, 2021
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer- generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of Appeals.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

No. A-1-CA-38260

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. as Trustee on behalf of the Holders of the HARBORVIEW MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST MORTGAGE LOAN PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-12,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MARIE C. RUSSO,

Defendant-Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANTA FE COUNTY David K. Thomson, District Judge

Holland & Hart LLP Larry J. Montaño Julia Broggi Santa Fe, NM

for Appellee

Rachel O. Woods Albuquerque, NM

for Appellant

DECISION

BOGARDUS, Judge.

{1} Appellant Marie Russo appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellee Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee on behalf of the holders of the Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Pass-Through Certificate, Series 2006-12 in a foreclosure action as well as the district court’s denial of her motion to reconsider. On appeal, Russo argues (1) the judgment is not a final order, (2) her right to due process was violated, (3) Wells Fargo failed to prove standing, and (4) the original dismissal from the 2011 case corresponding to this matter should be “enforced or reversed.”

{2} “[I]t is the appellant’s burden to demonstrate, by providing well-supported and clear arguments, that the district court has erred.” Premier Trust of Nev., Inc. v. City of Albuquerque, 2021-NMCA-004, ¶ 10, ___ P.3d ___. We conclude, after thorough and careful review of the briefing, the authorities cited therein, and the record of both the case before us and the related case, D-101-CV-2011-03167, that Russo has not demonstrated an error on the part of the district court that requires reversal. See Farmers, Inc., v. Dal Mach. & Fabricating, Inc., 1990-NMSC-100, ¶ 8, 111 N.M. 6, 800 P.2d 1063 (“The presumption upon review favors the correctness of the [district] court’s actions. Appellant must affirmatively demonstrate its assertion of error.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order granting summary judgment and denying Russo’s motion for reconsideration.

{3} IT IS SO ORDERED.

KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge

WE CONCUR:

J. MILES HANISEE, Chief Judge

JACQUELINE R. MEDINA, Judge