Court Opinion

ID: 9560729
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:54:33.445522+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:08.907397
License: Public Domain

STOWERS, Justice, specially concurring. I would affirm the judgment of the trial court but for reasons other than those stated in the majority opinion. While I agree that Ashlock is entitled to recovery under a breach of contract theory, I do not agree that substantial evidence was presented at trial from which the court could have, found a breach of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act. The Bank’s conduct herein did not violate the requirements of the Act. Under this Act, a false or misleading representation to a consumer must be “knowingly made.” NMSA 1978, § 57-12-2(C) (Repl.Pamp. 1987); Richardson Ford Sales, Inc. v. Johnson, 100 N.M. 779, 782, 676 P.2d 1344, 1347 (Ct.App.1984). No such finding was made. I would, therefore, affirm the trial court on the basis that the Bank breached its contract with Ashlock by failing to pay the interest to which he was entitled.