August 10, 2020- Benjamin Grossetete v. US Eagle F.C.U., No. A-1-CA-38668

Corrections to this opinion/decision not affecting the outcome, at the Court’s discretion, can occur up to the time of publication with
NM Compilation Commission. The Court will ensure that the electronic version of this opinion/decision is updated accordingly in
Odyssey.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO	1
BENJAMIN GROSSETETE,	2
Plaintiff-Appellant	3
v. 	NO. A-1-CA-38668	4
US EAGLE F.C.U.,	5
Defendant-Appellee.	6
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY	7
Lisa Chavez Ortega, District Judge	8
Benjamin Grossetete	9
Albuquerque, NM	10
Pro Se Appellant	11
Justin B. Breen	12
Albuquerque, NM	13
for Appellee	14
MEMORANDUM OPINION	15
VARGAS, Judge.	16
{1} 	Plaintiff appealed following the dismissal of his claims with prejudice. We	17
issued a notice of proposed summary disposition in which we proposed to reverse.	18
Plaintiff has filed a memorandum in support, and Defendant has filed a memorandum	19
in opposition. After due consideration, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.	20
Court of Appeals of New Mexico
Filed 8/10/2020 9:13 AM

2
{2} 	We previously set forth the relevant background information. We will not	1
reiterate at length here. Instead, we will focus on the content of the responsive	2
memoranda.	3
{3} 	Defendant makes no attempt to argue that the district court’s dismissal of the	4
complaint on the stated basis, failure to join an indispensable party, is affirmable. We	5
therefore adhere to our initial assessment.	6
{4} 	Nevertheless, Defendant urges this Court to consider the merits of one or more	7
of the alternate theories advanced in its motion to dismiss. [MIO 2-9] As we observed	8
in the notice of proposed summary disposition, [CN 6] the district court did not render	9
a ruling on those aspects of Defendant’s motion. We are not inclined to consider such	10
unaddressed arguments. See, e.g., Cottonwood Enters. v. McAlpin, 1989-NMSC-064,	11
¶ 15, 109 N.M. 78, 781 P.2d 1156. However, the district court may take those matters	12
under consideration on remand. See id.	13
{5} 	In the memorandum in support, Plaintiff similarly requests that this Court pass	14
upon various aspects of the underlying merits, which have not been addressed by the	15
district court. [Unnumbered MIS 1-2] We note simply that we are in no position to do	16
so. See generally Morris v. Brandenburg, 2015-NMCA-100, ¶ 53, 356 P.3d 564 (“Our	17
Court is not in the position to make factual findings relevant to issues left unaddressed	18
by the district court.”), aff’d, 2016-NMSC-027, 376 P.3d 836; Rangel v. Save-Mart,	19

3
Inc., 2006-NMCA-120, ¶ 36, 140 N.M. 395, 142 P.3d 983 (“We do not consider	1
matters not of record.”).	2
{6} 	Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the notice of proposed summary	3
disposition and above, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.	4
{7} 	IT IS SO ORDERED.	5
__________________________________	6
JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge	7
WE CONCUR:	8
_________________________________	9
J. MILES HANISEE, Chief Judge	10
_________________________________	11
KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge	12