STATE OF NEW MEXICO

COUNTY OF BERNALILLO
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

STELLA PADILLA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. D 202 CV 2017-03556

NATALIE HOWARD,
In her capacity as City Clerk,

Defendant.

MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST HARASSMENT OF

THE DEFENDANT BY ANY VOLUNTEER OR OTHER PERSON
ASSOCIATED WITH PLAINTIFFS CAMPAIGN ORGANIZATION

Defendant Natalie Howard, in her capacity as City Clerk of Albuquerque,

by her attorneys of record, William W. Zarr, Assistant City Attorney, and

Nicholas Bullock, Assistant City Attorney, moves this Court for an order of

protection prohibiting harassment against the Defendant by any volunteer or other

person associated with Plaintiffs campaign organization, and in support thereof,

states as follows:

1. This motion is brought to protect Defendant Natalie Y. Howard

from further aggressive behavior toward her by any volunteer or other person

associated with Plaintiffs campaign for mayor. The conduct which gives rise to

this motion was engaged in by a close participant and volunteer in Plaintiffs

campaign organization.

2. The affidavit of Defendant Natalie Y. Howard is attached hereto in

support of this motion.

3. On May 19, 2017, Plaintiffs adult daughter Vanessa Padilla came

to the City Clerks Office on the 7th floor of the Plaza del Sol building located at
600 2nd Street NW for the purpose of serving the Defendant in her capacity as

City Clerk with the Complaint in this action.

4. Upon information and belief, Padilla is the daughter of Plaintiff

Stella Padilla and an active volunteer in Plaintiffs mayoral campaign. Vanessa

Padilla will hereinafter be referred to as Padilla, and Plaintiff Stella Padilla will

be referred to as the Plaintiff.

5. The City Clerks Office has a public waiting/reception area as well

as secured areas where only employees have access through doors.

6. Defendant came out into the public reception area to be served

with the Complaint. Padilla asked Defendant if she was Natalie Howard, which

Defendant acknowledged. Padilla then served Defendant with a copy of the

complaint.

7. Padilla then began to insist that Defendant sign the affidavit of

service. Defendant declined to do so, since that is the responsibility of the person

serving process, and advised Padilla that she would contact the Assistant City

Attorney for clarification. Defendant then began to walk back through the door

into the non-public secured area of the City Clerks office to call the Assistant

City Attorney. Padilla yelled at Defendant that Defendant could not go back (into

the secured area) until she signed the affidavit.

8. Defendant continued to go into the secured area. As the door was

closing, Padilla pushed the door open and entered into the non-public area of the

Clerks office, and followed the Defendant into the non-public area and stood

within 12 inches of the Defendant while continuing to insist that the Defendant

sign the affidavit.

2
 9. The Defendant then directed staff to contact security, at which time

Padilla left the secured area into the public reception area.

10. Padilla remained in the public area outside of the glass partition

insisting that she needed Defendants signature so that she would not have to pay

for parking even though there is no fee charged for parking at Plaza del Sol.

11. Approximately 5 minutes later, Defendant and a member of her

staff, now escorted by a security officer to go to a meeting outside of the building,

went into the hallway from the City Clerks office on the 7th floor to call the

elevator to descend. Padilla was not in the waiting area of the City Clerks office.

12. When the elevator that was called reached the 7th floor and the

door opened, Padilla was alone in that elevator.

13. Defendant and her staff member entered the elevator together with

the security officer and rode directly down to the basement floor. Padilla

remained on the elevator as it descended, staring at the Defendant, and exited on

the ground floor, which is the first floor above the basement floor.

14. Subsequently, on June 5, 2017 as Defendant was outside of the

Bernalillo County Courthouse walking on her way into the courthouse to attend a

hearing on this case, Padilla made a point of approaching the Defendant as the

Defendant had just finished walking up the steps of the courthouse. Padilla was

carrying a Stella for Mayor sign and positioned herself approximately six

inches away from the Defendant, and yelled at the Defendant about the case.

Padilla proceeded to walk backward directly in front of the Defendant with the

sign in front of the Defendants face, blocking her path. Defendant felt that

Padilla was trying to intimidate her. When the Defendant told Padilla to stop the

harassment, Padilla replied: You dont know what harassment is.

3
 15. Padilla has on two occasions engaged in aggressive behavior

toward Defendant Natalie Howard during the course of this lawsuit. In the second

instance, Padilla purposefully came physically very close to the Defendant in an

attempt to harass or intimidate her. Padilla also told Defendant on that date that

You dont know what harassment is.

16. This pattern of conduct on Padillas part is hostile and serves no

legitimate purpose, and is being done for the purpose of annoying or alarming the

Defendant.

17. Based on this pattern of conduct, Defendant has reasonably

become concerned for the physical safety of her person.

18. It is also apparent that Padilla is an active, close participant and

volunteer in her mothers mayoral campaign, and has acted as an agent for

Plaintiffs campaign as evidenced by her involvement in serving the complaint on

the Defendant on May 19, 2017.

19. Plaintiff, as an announced candidate for mayor, is ultimately

responsible for her campaigns compliance with state and local election laws,

even though she designates a campaign manager and treasurer and may have a

campaign committee.

20. Plaintiff and her inner campaign staff set the tone and parameters

of the campaign, and coordinate events and activities by volunteers, who are in

effect representatives of her campaign, and in some instances act as agents.

21. Plaintiff and her inner campaign staff arguably have some level or

control over the actions and behavior of the campaigns volunteers by setting

guidelines against behavior that negatively reflects upon the Plaintiffs campaign.

4
 22. As such, the Plaintiffs campaign bears some responsibility to

attempt to control the actions of Plaintiffs campaign volunteers, especially those

who are close to the Plaintiff and part of her inner circle.

23. Defendant is named as a party in this case arising from the exercise

of her duties to administer city elections. Defendant is also anticipated to testify as

a witness in this case.

24. As a party and as a witness, Defendant has the right to participate

in this litigation and to attend the proceedings of this Court without having to be

concerned with encountering or enduring harassing conduct or intimidation by

any person associated with the Plaintiffs campaign.

25. NMRA 1-026 provides for rules and procedures for deposition and

discovery. The issue raised by this motion admittedly does not arise from a

discovery request. However, paragraph C of Rule 1-026 NMRA conveys broad

authority on this Court to make any order which justice requires to protect

parties or persons from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or expense. That

section reads in pertinent part as follows:

Upon motion by any party or interested person for good cause, the court
may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person
from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or expense, including one or
more of the following[limitations on discovery].

The Defendant submits that the above language is sufficiently broad enough to

encompass the protection of a party or person whether or not the need for

protection arises out of a discovery matter.

26. The relief sought in this motion is reasonable and for the protection

of a party and a witness.

5
 27. Plaintiffs attorney has been contacted and [concurs in][opposes]

this motion.

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, Defendant respectfully requests

that this Court issue an order protecting the Defendant from any person who is a

volunteer or otherwise associated with the Plaintiffs campaign by prohibiting any

such persons from engaging in conduct directed at Defendants person, which a

reasonable person would find to be annoying, alarming, hostile or menacing in

nature, together with such other and further relief as may be proper.

Respectfully submitted,

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE
Jessica M. Hernandez, City Attorney

/s/ William W. Zarr

William W. Zarr
Nicholas H. Bullock
Assistant City Attorneys
City of Albuquerque
P.O. Box 2248
Albuquerque, NM 87103
(505) 768-4500
wzarr@cabq.gov
nbullock@cabq.gov

6
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June ____, 2017, I caused the foregoing Motion
For A Protective Order Against Harassment of the Defendant by any Volunteer or
Other Person Associated with Plaintiffs Campaign Organization to be filed
electronically through Odyssey File and Serve electronic filing system, which
caused the parties or counsel of record on the service list to be served by
electronic means.

A. Blair Dunn, Esq.

400 Gold Ave. SW, Suite 1000,
Albuquerque, NM 87102
(505) 750-3060
abdunn@ablairdunn-esq.com

/s/ William W. Zarr

Assistant City Attorney