exist). “Where a district court denies equitable re lief ... we review the matter for abuse of discretion.” In re Adoption Petition of Rebecca M., 2008-NMCA-038, ¶ 22, 143 N.M. 554, 178 P.3d 839. In this case, Aunt raised her extraordinary circumstances argument simultaneously with her assertion that the Act allowed her to intervene. Even presuming the existence of such extraordinary circumstances, however, we hold that, in the long run, though it eschewed a valid route for Aunt which leads to our reversal herein, the district court properly refused to consider Aunt’s custody claim because she had an “available or adequate remedy” under the Act. See In re Lupe C., 112 N.M. at 119, 812 P.2d at 368; see also Meiboom v. Watson, 2000-NMSC-004, ¶ 20, 128 N.M. 536, 994 P.2d 1154 (<HOLDING>). We consider that issue below. {12} Aunt’s
recognizing ability to affirm for any reason that finds support in record holding we may affirm on any grounds supported by the record even those not relied upon by the district court recognizing this court may affirm for any reason supported by the record holding that we may affirm a district court if its holding was right for any reason holding that it is axiomatic that this court can affirm a circuit court if the right result is reached even if for a different reason