Although Defendant suggests that this "neglects the essential judicial oversight" to which she is entitled, [MIO 3] the instant appeal supplies such oversight. See generally N.M. Const. art. VI, § 2 ("[A]n aggrieved party shall have an absolute right to one appeal."); Rogers v. Red Boots Invs., L.P., 2020-NMCA-028, ¶ 25, 464 P.3d 1064 ("[T]here are strict limitations on judicial review of arbitration awards." (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).

{¶4} Under the New Mexico Uniform Arbitration Act, "there are strict limitations on judicial review of arbitration awards." Rogers v. Red Boots Invs., L.P., 2020-NMCA-028, ¶ 25, 464 P.3d 1064 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). "In the absence of a statutory basis to vacate an arbitration award, the district court must enter an order confirming the award."

Thus, for any district court's review of arbitration awards for legal or factual errors, the grounds provided in Section 44-7A-25(a)(1), (3) appear to contemplate "technical problems in the execution of the award." Fernandez, 1993-NMSC-035, ¶ 9; see also Rogers v. Red Boots Invs., L.P., 2020-NMCA-028, ¶ 44, 464 P.3d 1064 (noting that the substantively similar previous version of Section 44-7A-25 "appeared to concern matters of technical issues in the execution of an arbitration award").

[CN 3] See Rogers v. Red Boots Invs., L.P., 2020-NMCA-028, ¶ 25, 464 P.3d 1064 ("In the absence of a statutory basis to vacate an arbitration award, the district court must enter an order confirming the award."