for this Court to rule on issues that the district court has not passed upon). {8} Petitioner’s pleadings, including the notice of administrative appeal and the statement of appellate issues, make clear that Petitioner seeks to challenge the City’s official decision on February 27, 2002, to approve ips. It is well established in this state that settlements and judgments entered by the consent of the litigants essentially represent contractual agreements. See Owen v. Burn Const. Co., 90 N.M. 297, 299, 563 P.2d 91, 93 (1977) (observing that “a stipulated judgment is not considered to be a judicial determination; rather it is a contract between the parties”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); Pope v. The Gap, Inc., 1998-NMCA-103, ¶ 18, 125 N.M. 376, 961 P.2d 1283 (<HOLDING>). {12} Had the stipulated dismissal
holding that a consent judgment is essentially a contract holding that because consent is not a statement and a request for consent is not an interrogation giving consent to search is a neutral fact which has no tendency to show that the suspect is guilty of any crime holding there is no consent as a matter of law where the consent was given under coercion holding that a patent infringement action is essentially a tort holding that essentially equivalent is unconstitutionally vague