Rogers v. Red Boots Invs., L.P.

4 Citing cases

  1. Absolute Resolutions Invs. v. Andazola

    No. A-1-CA-41491 (N.M. Ct. App. Jun. 10, 2024)

    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)).

  2. Maureen Ponce Singleton Revocable Tr. v. Brown

    No. A-1-CA-38919 (N.M. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2023)

    {¶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."

  3. Hurt v. Williams

    No. A-1-CA-39617 (N.M. Ct. App. Jul. 6, 2023)

    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").

  4. Kruskal v. Quintana

    No. A-1-CA-40619 (N.M. Ct. App. Jun. 27, 2023)

    [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."