Albuquerque Commons Partnership v. City Council (2011)
green
· 33 citation events
across 4 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201120182026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
State v. Farish (2017)
See Albuquerque Commons P'ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque , 2011-NMSC-002 , ¶ 23, 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 ("When faced with two provisions addressing the same topic, we resort to the familiar principle of statutory construction: a statute dealing with a specific subject will be considered an exception to, and give effect over, a more general statute." (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)); State v. Santillanes , 2001-NMSC-018 , ¶ 18, 130 N.M. 464 …
green
Cellco Partnership v. Town of Mesilla, New Mexico (2021)
Under both federal and New Mexico law, it is a “well established canon of statutory interpretation” that “the specific governs the general.” RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank, 566 U.S. 639, 645 (2012); see also, e.g., Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC-002, ¶ 24 , 149 N.M. 308, 314 , 248 P.3d 856, 862 (“Specific provisions govern over general provisions.”); Marbob Energy Corp. v. N.M.
green
LSF9 Master Participation Trust v. Moreno (2019)
See Rule 1-015(A) (mandating that “leave shall be freely given when justice requires”); see also Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 , 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (“When faced with two provisions addressing the same topic, we resort to a familiar principle of statutory construction: a statute dealing with a specific subject will be considered an exception to, and given effect over, a more general statute.” (internal quotatio…
green
TexasFile LLC v. Board of Cty. Comm’rs of Lea Cty. (2019)
See 2005-NMCA-022, ¶ 24 ; see also Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 , 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (“When faced with two provisions addressing the same topic, we resort to a familiar principle of statutory construction: a statute dealing with a specific subject will be considered an exception to, and given effect over, a more general statute.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
See 2005-NMCA-022 , ¶ 24, 137 N.M. 26 , 106 P.3d 1273 ; see also Albuquerque Commons P'ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque , 2011-NMSC-002 , ¶ 23, 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 ("When faced with two provisions addressing the same topic, we resort to a familiar principle of statutory construction: a statute dealing with a specific subject will be considered an exception to, and given effect over, a more general statute." (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) ).
green
Cable One, Inc. v. N.M. Taxation & Revenue Dep't (2017)
See Albuquerque Commons P'ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque , 2011-NMSC-002 , ¶ 7, 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (explaining that courts "may only add words to a statute where it is necessary to make the statute conform to the [L]egislature's clear intent, or to prevent the statute from being absurd" (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
green
State v. Farish (2017)
See Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC-002, ¶ 23 , 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (“When faced with two provisions addressing the same topic, we resort to the familiar principle of statutory construction: a statute dealing with a specific subject will be considered an exception to, and give effect over, a more general statute.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)); State v. Santillanes, 2001-NMSC- 018, ¶ 18, 130 N.M. 464 , …
See Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC-002, ¶ 15 , 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (“When the Legislature enacts a statute we presume that it is aware of existing statutes.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); V.P.
green
Cable One, Inc. v. N.M. Taxation & Revenue Dep't (2017)
See Albuquerque Commons P’ship v. City Council of City of Albuquerque, 2011-NMSC- 002, ¶ 7, 149 N.M. 308 , 248 P.3d 856 (explaining that courts “may only add words to a statute where it is necessary to make the statute conform to the [L]egislature’s clear intent, or to prevent the statute from being absurd” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).