Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Mexico courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bogan v. SANDOVAL CTY. PLAN. & ZON. COM'Ngreen2 sentences2004In so doing, the Court of Appeals held that “where circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have revealed.” Id. at 341, 890 P.2d at 402. 2004See Bogan v. Sandoval County Planning & Zoning Comm’n, 119 N.M. 334 , 341, 890 P.2d 395 , 402 (Ct.App.1994) (stating that “where circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have revealed”); see also Nazarova v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 171 F.3d 478, 483 (7th Cir. 1999) (approving of English-language notice to a non-English speaker who faced deportation so long as the notice would trigger further inquiry by a reasonable recipient); Soberal-Perez v. Heckler, 717 F.2d 36, 43 ( | 4 | 6 |
Germany v. Murdockgreen2 sentences1994Germany v. Murdock, 99 N.M. 679, 681 , 662 P.2d 1346, 1348 (1983). 1994Germany v. Murdock, 99 N.M. 679, 681 , 662 P.2d 1346, 1348 (1983). | 2 | 2 |
Natalia Nazarova v. Immigration & Naturalization Servicegreen1 sentence2004See Bogan v. Sandoval County Planning & Zoning Comm’n, 119 N.M. 334 , 341, 890 P.2d 395 , 402 (Ct.App.1994) (stating that “where circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have revealed”); see also Nazarova v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 171 F.3d 478, 483 (7th Cir. 1999) (approving of English-language notice to a non-English speaker who faced deportation so long as the notice would trigger further inquiry by a reasonable recipient); Soberal-Perez v. Heckler, 717 F.2d 36, 43 ( | 1 | 1 |
Soberal-Perez v. Hecklergreen1 sentence2004See Bogan v. Sandoval County Planning & Zoning Comm’n, 119 N.M. 334 , 341, 890 P.2d 395 , 402 (Ct.App.1994) (stating that “where circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have revealed”); see also Nazarova v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 171 F.3d 478, 483 (7th Cir. 1999) (approving of English-language notice to a non-English speaker who faced deportation so long as the notice would trigger further inquiry by a reasonable recipient); Soberal-Perez v. Heckler, 717 F.2d 36, 43 ( | 1 | 1 |
Golden Gate Corp. v. Town of Narragansettgreen2 sentences1998In Golden Gate Corp. v. Town of Narragansett, 116 R.I. 552 , 359 A.2d 321, 323 (1976), the Supreme Court of Rhode Island observed that “notice to be given in connection with any proposed comprehensive revision of the zoning classifications for large areas of a community need not be as specific as the notice relating to a possible change in the zoning classification of one particular parcel of land.” The court then provided a test requiring the notice reasonably to inform landowners of the zoning in a manner that would be comprehensible to the average citizen, a test similar to New Mexico’s. 1998In Golden Gate Corp. v. Town of Narragansett, 116 R.I. 552 , 359 A.2d 321, 323 (1976), the Supreme Court of Rhode Island observed that “notice to be given in connection with any proposed comprehensive revision of the zoning classifications for large areas of a community need not be as specific as the notice relating to a possible change in the zoning classification of one particular parcel of land.” The court then provided a test requiring the notice reasonably to inform landowners of the zoning in a manner that would be comprehensible to the average citizen, a test similar to New Mexico’s. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Maso v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO TAXATION
green
2 sentences2015The Court’s reasoning was based in part on Maso v. 20 State Taxation & Revenue Department, in which the Court noted that “where 10 1 circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that 2 person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have 3 revealed.” 2004-NMSC-028, ¶ 13 , 136 N.M. 161 , 96 P.3d 286 (internal quotation 4 marks and citation omitted). 2015The Court’s reasoning was based in part on Maso v. 20 State Taxation & Revenue Department, in which the Court noted that “where 10 1 circumstances are such that a reasonably prudent person should make inquiries, that 2 person is charged with knowledge of the facts reasonable inquiry would have 3 revealed.” 2004-NMSC-028, ¶ 13 , 136 N.M. 161 , 96 P.3d 286 (internal quotation 4 marks and citation omitted). | 7 | 2004–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.