Naumburg v. Cummins

• Decision Date: 16 July 1982
• Docket Number: No. 14110,14110
• Citation: 98 N.M. 274,648 P.2d 313,1982 NMSC 86
• Parties: Peter NAUMBURG, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernest CUMMINS and Barbara L. Cummins, Defendants-Appellants, and Buena Vista Estates, Inc., Defendant.
• Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

Page 313

648 P.2d 313

98 N.M. 274

Peter NAUMBURG, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.Ernest CUMMINS and Barbara L. Cummins, Defendants-Appellants and Buena Vista Estates, Inc., Defendant.

No. 14110.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

July 16, 1982.

James E. Womack, Albuquerque, for defendants-appellants.

Simons, Cuddy & Friedman, Thomas A. Simons, IV, Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee.

Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk, George T. Harris, Jr., Albuquerque, for defendant.

OPINION

PAYNE, Justice.

Plaintiff Naumberg, a resident of Santa Fe, brought suit in the district court of Bernalillo County against Defendants Cummins, residents of Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, and a New Mexico corporation, Buena Vista Estates, Inc.(Buena Vista), a New Mexico corporation having its principal place of business at Albuquerque.The complaint was based on a real estate contract involving lands in Santa Fe County.Under the contract, the Cummins sold the property to Naumberg, allegedly with the promise that the Cummins would find a subsequent buyer for Naumberg.The Cummins have failed to do so, and Naumberg has ceased payment under the contract.The Cummins assigned their interest to Buena Vista.Naumberg sought relief by way of injunction, recission, declaratory judgment, reformation of the contract, and monetary damages.

Asserting that venue was improper under Section 38-3-1,N.M.S.A.1978(Cum.Supp.1981), because the suit involved land situated in Santa Fe County, the Cummins filed a motion to dismiss.The motion was denied by the trial court and the Cummins appeal.We reverse.

Section 38-3-1 provides:

All civil actions commenced in the district courts shall be brought and shall be commenced in counties as follows and not otherwise:

D. (1) when lands or any interest in lands are the object of any suit in whole or in part, such suit shall be brought in the county where the land or any portion thereof is situate.

In Rito Cebolla Inv., Ltd. v. Golden West Land, 94 N.M. 121, 607 P.2d 659(Ct.App.1980), the Court of Appeals held that venue was not in the county in which the real estate involved was located (Mora County) when the parties had their principal places of business in Bernalillo County.The sales contract was executed in Bernalillo County and the only relief requested was damages for misrepresentation.The action "did not affect the title to, or ownership of, the property"Id. at 123, 607 P.2d at 661.

This case presents a similar fact pattern with the...