Court Opinion

ID: 9548872
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 18:09:59.814369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:19:32.906844
License: Public Domain

LOPEZ, Judge (specially concurring). I concur in the result only. This appeal is based only upon the issue of dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted by the courts of this state, The issue on review is whether the plaintiff would be entitled to recover under any state of facts provable under the claim that is made. Tapia v. McKenzie, 83 N.M. 116, 489 P.2d 181 (Ct.App.1971). Section 309, Title 7, of the Navajo Tribal Code is similar to § 50A-9-507(l), N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol. 8, pt. 1), a statute under which relief could be granted for wrongful repossession. Were I asked to decide this case under § 50A-9-507(l), supra, I might rule quite differently. The purpose of the letter section is merely to afford an appropriate remedy to an individual for wrongful repossession under the U.C.C., Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 9-507, Official Comment (1968). The purpose of the former section is to preserve peace in Navajo lands and jurisdiction of the Navajo tribal courts over internal matters. 7 N.T.C. § 309, History (1970). Essentially, 7 N.T.C. § 309 is “a punishment of an offense against the public, or a grant of a civil right to a private person.” Huntington v. Attrill, 146 U.S. 657, 13 S. Ct. 224, 36 L.Ed. 1123 (1892); McGrath v. Tobin, 81 R.I. 415, 103 A.2d 795 (1954). As such, the Navajo statute is penal in nature and should not be enforced in this state. The Antelope, 10 Wheat. 66, 6 L. Ed. 268 (1825). See also Stiff v. Fogerson, 58 N.M. 193, 269 P.2d 743 (1954). Since the foreign statute under which relief is sought is essentially penal, I agree with the court below that this action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.