Oschwald v. Christie

Decision Date12 December 1980
Docket NumberNo. 13216,13216
Citation620 P.2d 1276,1980 NMSC 136,95 N.M. 251
PartiesDonald R. OSCHWALD, Petitioner, v. Clara CHRISTIE, Ray Stewart and Ralph Dennis, d/b/a Unique Builders Const. Co., a New Mexico partnership, and Harold Rogers and Margaret Ann Rogers, his wife, Respondents.
CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court
Anaya & Strumor, Robert M. Strumor, Santa Fe, for petitioner
OPINION

PAYNE, Justice.

An action was filed for injury to Clara Christie due to the alleged negligent and improper construction of a residence. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Oschwald. The judgment was overturned by the Court of Appeals and Oschwald petitioned to this Court for a writ of certiorari. We reverse and reinstate the trial court's ruling granting summary judgment.

Because of problems in a newly constructed home Christie's daughter and son-in-law hired Oschwald, an architect, to inspect the home and indicate areas not in compliance with the contract's specifications. Oschwald was not employed until after the construction of the home was essentially completed. He was not the project architect and therefore had not designed or supervised the construction of the home.

Some time after Oschwald had completed his inspection of the home and made his recommendations, Christie was injured when she fell while descending stairs in the home. She filed suit against Oschwald claiming he had been negligent in the performance of his duties as an architect. She also included as defendants the builders of the home. Oschwald filed a motion for summary judgment and a third party complaint against the homeowners. The trial court granted the summary judgment and dismissed the third party complaint.

In Goodman v. Brock, 83 N.M. 789, 792-93, 498 P.2d 676, 679-80 (1972), we set forth the respective burdens on the various parties in a summary judgment hearing as follows:

Unquestionably the burden was on defendants to show an absence of a genuine issue of fact, or that they were entitled as a matter of law for some other reason to a summary judgment in their favor. (Citations omitted.) However, once defendants had made a prima facie showing that they were entitled to summary judgment, the burden was on plaintiff to show that there was a genuine factual issue and that defendants were not entitled as a matter of law to summary judgment * * * * (Citations omitted.)

The burden was on the plaintiff, as the party resisting the motion for summary judgment, to come forward and demonstrate that a genuine issue of fact requiring a trial did exist. This burden is contemplated and required by Rule 56(e) * * * *

See also Smith Const. Co. v. Knights of Columbus, Coun., 86 N.M. 50, 519 P.2d 286 (1974). If Oschwald met his burden of establishing a prima facie case in favor of summary judgment, the burden then fell upon Christie to come forward and show that a genuine issue of material fact existed.

Oschwald made a prima facie showing that he was entitled to summary judgment and thereby satisfactorily met his burden. Oschwald, by deposition and affidavit, showed that he had agreed to "inspect the * * * residence and make a list of those items which, in my professional opinion are deficient. I will also make reasonable recommendations for correction as to the cited deficiencies * * * * " He submitted a nine-page report to the homeowners, which pointed out, among other things, that the stairs did not conform to the contract plans. In addition, he measured the rise and run of each stair and called the Construction Industries Commission to make sure the stairs conformed to the Uniform Building Code. An inspector for General Construction also inspected the residence and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Guest v. Berardinelli
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • February 29, 2008
    ...undisputed facts to support a judgment and many of the disputed facts relate to immaterial issues. See Oschwald v. Christie, 95 N.M. 251, 253, 620 P.2d 1276, 1278 (1980). {23} Our decision to affirm the district court rests on the distinction between a disputed fact and a genuine issue of f......
  • Gallegos v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • December 15, 1987
    ...response, by affidavits or otherwise, must set forth specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial. See Oschwald v. Christie, 95 N.M. 251, 620 P.2d 1276 (1980). And if he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, will be entered against him. R. 1-056(E). We now dete......
  • Deaton v. Gutierrez
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • December 18, 2003
    ...may be proper even though some disputed facts remain, if the disputed facts relate to immaterial issues. See Oschwald v. Christie, 95 N.M. 251, 253, 620 P.2d 1276, 1278 (1980). Legal Status of SHC 2994 Prior To Issuance of {13} We first address whether the trial court was correct in its con......
  • Archuleta v. Goldman
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • March 19, 1987
    ...the prima facie showing by relying solely upon allegations contained in an unverified complaint or mere argument. Oschwald v. Christie, 95 N.M. 251, 620 P.2d 1276 (1980); SCRA 1986, Rule Plaintiff contends that whether he was actually provided the necessary treatment for his back injury is ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT