Application of Angel Fire Corp.
| Decision Date | 22 September 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 13581,13581 |
| Citation | 96 N.M. 651,634 P.2d 202,1981 NMSC 95 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Application of ANGEL FIRE CORPORATION for a Supplemental Well, ANGEL FIRE CORPORATION, Applicant-Appellant, v. C. S. CATTLE COMPANY, Springer Ditch Company and The City of Springer, Protestants-Appellees, v. S. E. REYNOLDS, State Engineer, Party in Interest-Appellant. |
| Court | New Mexico Supreme Court |
This appeal requires a determination of the proper procedure for appeal to the district courts from actions taken by the State Engineer. § 72-7-1, N.M.S.A. 1978.
The relevant events transpired as follows:
September 8, 1978 Appellant Angel Fire applied for a supplemental water well.
September 22, 1980 The State Engineer issued findings and an order favorable to Angel Fire.
October 1, 1980 Angel Fire petitioned to modify the order.
October 6, 1980 C. S. Cattle Co. (C. S.) filed a Notice of Appeal in district court and mailed copies to Angel Fire's counsel.
October 28, 1980 The State Engineer issued a second order in the case, denying all significant modifications requested by Angel Fire but correcting an inconsequential error found in the September 22 order.
October 30, 1980 C. S. received a copy of the State Engineer's modification order of October 28, 1980.
October 30, 1980 Angel Fire was personally served with notice of C. S.'s appeal from the September 22 order.
December 31, 1980 Angel Fire moved to dismiss C. S.'s appeal on grounds that the court lacked jurisdiction because Angel Fire had not been personally served within thirty days after the September 22 decision.
March 10, 1981 The district court denied Angel Fire's motion to dismiss and authorized an interlocutory appeal.
Angel Fire appeals the district court's denial of its motion to dismiss.
Section 72-12-10, N.M.S.A. 1978, states that "(t)he decision of the state engineer shall be final in all cases unless appeal be taken to the district court within thirty days after his decision as provided by § 72-7-1 N.M.S.A. 1978." Section 72-7-1, N.M.S.A. 1978, states:
A. Any applicant or other party dissatisfied with any decision, act or refusal to act of the state engineer may appeal to the district court....
B. Appeals to the district court shall be taken by serving a notice of appeal upon the state engineer and all parties interested within thirty days after receipt by certified mail of notice of the decision, act or refusal to act. If an appeal is not timely taken, the action of the state engineer is conclusive.
C. The notice of appeal may be served in the same manner as a summons in civil actions brought before the district court or by publication is (in) some newspaper... once a week for four consecutive weeks. The last publication shall be at least twenty days prior to the date the appeal may be heard. Proof of service of the notice of appeal shall be made in the same manner as in actions brought in the district court and shall be filed in the district court within thirty days after service is complete.
The judiciary determines rules of procedure for cases within the judicial system, Ammerman v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc., 89 N.M. 307, 551 P.2d 1354 (1976) cert. denied, 436 U.S. 906, 98 S.Ct. 2237, 56 L.Ed.2d 404 (1978); State v. Roy, 40 N.M. 397, 60 P.2d 646 (1936), pursuant to its authority under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Saavedra v. Lowe's Home Centers Inc.
...1289] jurisdiction. See Mitchell–Carr v. McLendon, 127 N.M. 282, 286, 980 P.2d 65, 71 (1999); Angel Fire Corp. v.C.S. Cattle Co., 96 N.M. 651, 652, 634 P.2d 202, 203 (1981) (“Jurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the courts until the statutorily required administrative proc......
-
State ex rel. Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque v. City of Albuquerque
...("The power of courts to disturb the actions of administrative agencies is generally quite limited."); In re Angel Fire Corp., 96 N.M. 651, 652, 634 P.2d 202, 203 (1981) ("Jurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the courts until the statutorily required administrative procedu......
-
Mitchell-Carr v. McLendon
...remedies may mean that the district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, see Angel Fire Corp. v. C.S. Cattle Co. (In re Angel Fire Corp.), 96 N.M. 651, 652, 634 P.2d 202, 203 (1981) ("Jurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the courts until the statutorily required admini......
-
Maples v. State
...argues that the statute should control despite this strong language, based on the precedent set in In re Application of Angel Fire Corporation, 96 N.M. 651, 634 P.2d 202 (1981). In that case we found that administrative procedures must be exhausted before the court gains jurisdiction. In th......
-
CHAPTER 8 WATER RIGHTS LITIGATION FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCES PRACTITIONER
...(1978). [17] N.M. STAT. ANN. § 72-7-1 (1978). For the peculiarities of perfecting such an appeal, see Angel Fire Corp. v. C.S. Cattle Co., 634 P.2d 202 (1981). [18] Id.; N.M. STAT. ANN. §§ 72-5-23 ; § 72-5-24 (surface water); § 72-12-7 (ground water) (1978). [19] Codified as N.M. STAT. ANN.......