Borde v. Board of County Commissioners
514 F. App'x 795
10th Cir.2013Background
- Borde and Bostick signed February 26, 2008 multiyear employment contracts with Luna County granting severance on termination or nonrenewal.
- Termination occurred June 23, 2009; County refused severance; no prior notice or hearing for the employees.
- District court held contracts void ab initio under NM Constitution article IX, §10, concluding no protected property interest in severance benefits.
- Plaintiffs alleged §1983 claims (due process, Monell) and state-law breach of contract; district court dismissed those claims and declined supplemental jurisdiction.
- Court affirms district court: contracts are invalid as unconstitutional debt; employees have no protected property interest; at-will status governs absent a valid contract.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of contracts under NM constitution | Borde/Bostick argue contracts are not debt and valid | County contends contracts violate article IX, §10 | Contracts void ab initio; debt violation under NM Constitution |
| Existence of protected property interest in severance after void contracts | Severance rights survive via Luna County Personnel Ordinance | No protected interest due to void contracts; at-will status | No protected property interest; claims fail |
| Right to amend to add Personnel Ordinance claims | Amendment would create rights under the Ordinance | Amendment futile; at-will rule remains | Leave to amend denied as futile; amendments would be dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Hamilton Test Sys., Inc. v. City of Albuquerque, 704 P.2d 1102 (N.M. 1985) (invalid debt under constitutional restrictions when city funds beyond current year could be obligated)
- Montano v. Gabaldon, 766 P.2d 1328 (N.M. 1989) (broad indebtedness interpretation; forbidden future economic commitments)
- Seward v. Bowers, 24 P.2d 253 (N.M. 1933) (debt concept under constitutional debt restrictions)
- Allstate Leasing Corp. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 450 F.2d 26 (10th Cir. 1971) (NM debt limitation interpreted to constrain county indebtedness)
- Shoup Voting Mach. Corp. v. Bd. of Comm’rs, 256 P.2d 1068 (N.M. 1953) (void contract for incurring prohibited indebtedness)
- Dacy v. Vill. of Ruidoso, 845 P.2d 793 (N.M. 1992) (damages unavailable for illegal contracts; void status affect remedies)
- Figuly v. City of Douglas, 76 F.3d 1137 (10th Cir. 1996) (void contract leads to at-will status; no protected property interest)
- Hartbarger v. Frank Paxton Co., 857 P.2d 776 (N.M. 1993) (employment-at-will default rule in NM)