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.
13 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2024 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Republican Party v. New Mexico Taxation & Revenue Departmentgreen2 sentences2022The Newspaper is correct that our Legislature has mandated a broad disclosure requirement for public records, see § 14-2-5 (stating that the “greatest possible information regarding . . . the official acts of public officers” shall be made available to all interested persons), and we have a “presumption that public policy favors the right of inspection.” Bd. of Comm’rs of Doña Ana Cnty. v. Las Cruces Sun-News, 2003-NMCA-102, ¶ 11 , 134 N.M. 283 , 76 P.3d 36 , superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Republican Party of N.M., 2012-NMSC-026, ¶¶ 14-16 . 2021Tax’n & Revenue Dep’t, 2012-NMSC-026, ¶ 49 , 283 P.3d 853 (“Where appropriate, courts should conduct an in camera review of the documents at issue as part of their evaluation of privilege.”).We note that the district court’s decision to decline to conduct an in camera review of the recordings and documents simply supports our conclusion that the contents of the recordings remain a disputed issue of material fact; we also note that neither party opposed an in camera review of the disputed recordings and documents. [RP 93-94; MIO 11] Summary judgment, however, “is not an opportunity to resolve f | 3 | 5 |
Gardner-Zemke Co. v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Tax’n & Revenue Dep’t, 2012-NMSC-026, ¶ 49 , 283 P.3d 853 (“Where appropriate, courts should conduct an in camera review of the documents at issue as part of their evaluation of privilege.”).We note that the district court’s decision to decline to conduct an in camera review of the recordings and documents simply supports our conclusion that the contents of the recordings remain a disputed issue of material fact; we also note that neither party opposed an in camera review of the disputed recordings and documents. [RP 93-94; MIO 11] Summary judgment, however, “is not an opportunity to resolve f 2021Tax’n & Revenue Dep’t, 2012-NMSC-026, ¶ 49 , 283 P.3d 853 (“Where appropriate, courts should conduct an in camera review of the documents at issue as part of their evaluation of privilege.”).We note that the district court’s decision to decline to conduct an in camera review of the recordings and documents simply supports our conclusion that the contents of the recordings remain a disputed issue of material fact; we also note that neither party opposed an in camera review of the disputed recordings and documents. [RP 93-94; MIO 11] Summary judgment, however, “is not an opportunity to resolve f | 1 | 1 |
State v. Seiglinggreen1 sentence2018For example, dismissal without prejudice may 13 remedy the disclosure violation but would “not effectively bar the continuation of 14 prosecution by the [s]tate.” Seigling, 2017-NMCA-035, ¶ 23 (citing LR2-400(I) 15 (2014) to suggest that dismissal without prejudice is an effective sanction, because 16 where the case is refiled following dismissal without prejudice, dismissal with 17 prejudice is the presumptive sanction for continued failure to comply with the rule). 18 {17} In this case, even if we were to assume that the State’s seven-month delay in 19 submitting the suspected cocaine to a l | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bartlettgreen2 sentences1995See State v. Bartlett, 109 N.M. 679, 680 , 789 P.2d 627, 628 (Ct.App.1990). 1995See State v. Bartlett, 109 N.M. 679, 680 , 789 P.2d 627, 628 (Ct.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Arnold v. Stategreen2 sentences1989See Arnold v. State, 94 N.M. 381 , 610 P.2d 1210 (1980) (a court must ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature in construing a statute). 1989See Arnold v. State, 94 N.M. 381 , 610 P.2d 1210 (1980) (a court must ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature in construing a statute). | 1 | 1 |
cluster 339407green1 sentence1986See Baker v. Southern Pacific Transportation, 542 F.2d 1123 (9th Cir.1976); Heffern v. First Interstate Bank, 99 N.M. 531 , 660 P.2d 621 (Ct.App.1983); 3 J. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
ACLU of New Mexico v. Duran
green
2 sentences2024Because “cases are not considered authority for propositions not considered,” Britton v. Off. of Att’y Gen., 2019-NMCA-002, ¶ 24 , 433 P.3d 320 , and because Petitioner provides no other legal authority to support her argument that “records created in relation to medical care constitute public records” 2Toward the end of Petitioner’s summary judgment argument, she states that “the district court disregarded [an] appellate mandate” from American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico v. Duran that “[o]ur IPRA jurisprudence contemplates in camera review in circumstances in which the applicability o 2022“Our IPRA jurisprudence contemplates in camera review in circumstances in which the applicability of a disclosure exception is in question.” Duran, 2016-NMCA-063 , ¶ 45. | 3 | 2021–2024 |
State Ex Rel. Newsome v. Alarid
red
2 sentences2010"A construction must be given which will not render the statute's application absurd or unreasonable and which will not defeat the object of the Legislature." Id. *506 {16} Interpreting the statute as a whole, we are mindful that our Legislature has mandated a broad disclosure requirement for public records. 2010“A construction must be given which will not render the statute’s application absurd or unreasonable and which will not defeat the object of the Legislature.” Id. {16} Interpreting the statute as a whole, we are mindful that our Legislature has mandated a broad disclosure requirement for public records. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Britton v. Office of the Attorney Gen. of N.M.
green
1 sentence2024Because “cases are not considered authority for propositions not considered,” Britton v. Off. of Att’y Gen., 2019-NMCA-002, ¶ 24 , 433 P.3d 320 , and because Petitioner provides no other legal authority to support her argument that “records created in relation to medical care constitute public records” 2Toward the end of Petitioner’s summary judgment argument, she states that “the district court disregarded [an] appellate mandate” from American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico v. Duran that “[o]ur IPRA jurisprudence contemplates in camera review in circumstances in which the applicability o | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Britton v. Office of the Att'y Gen.
green
1 sentence2024Because “cases are not considered authority for propositions not considered,” Britton v. Off. of Att’y Gen., 2019-NMCA-002, ¶ 24 , 433 P.3d 320 , and because Petitioner provides no other legal authority to support her argument that “records created in relation to medical care constitute public records” 2Toward the end of Petitioner’s summary judgment argument, she states that “the district court disregarded [an] appellate mandate” from American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico v. Duran that “[o]ur IPRA jurisprudence contemplates in camera review in circumstances in which the applicability o | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Henry v. Gauman
green
1 sentence2024Petitioner then cites Henry v. Gauman, 2023-NMCA-078 , ¶ 23, 536 P.3d 498 , cert. denied (S-1-SC-40039, Oct. 5, 2023), for the proposition that “[i]n camera inspection may be required if an agency attempts to shield documents without adequately identifying their content or without identifying nonexempt attachments.” Petitioner does not explain how Duran or Henry support her implicit argument that in camera review was required by the facts in this case. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Cox v. New Mexico Department of Public Safety
green
1 sentence2022This Court took both the mandate and presumption into account when deciding Cox, 2010-NMCA-096, ¶ 16 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Board of Commissioners v. Las Cruces Sun-News
green
2 sentences2022The Newspaper is correct that our Legislature has mandated a broad disclosure requirement for public records, see § 14-2-5 (stating that the “greatest possible information regarding . . . the official acts of public officers” shall be made available to all interested persons), and we have a “presumption that public policy favors the right of inspection.” Bd. of Comm’rs of Doña Ana Cnty. v. Las Cruces Sun-News, 2003-NMCA-102, ¶ 11 , 134 N.M. 283 , 76 P.3d 36 , superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Republican Party of N.M., 2012-NMSC-026, ¶¶ 14-16 . 2022The Newspaper is correct that our Legislature has mandated a broad disclosure requirement for public records, see § 14-2-5 (stating that the “greatest possible information regarding . . . the official acts of public officers” shall be made available to all interested persons), and we have a “presumption that public policy favors the right of inspection.” Bd. of Comm’rs of Doña Ana Cnty. v. Las Cruces Sun-News, 2003-NMCA-102, ¶ 11 , 134 N.M. 283 , 76 P.3d 36 , superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Republican Party of N.M., 2012-NMSC-026, ¶¶ 14-16 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Harper
green
1 sentence2018For example, dismissal without prejudice may 13 remedy the disclosure violation but would “not effectively bar the continuation of 14 prosecution by the [s]tate.” Seigling, 2017-NMCA-035, ¶ 23 (citing LR2-400(I) 15 (2014) to suggest that dismissal without prejudice is an effective sanction, because 16 where the case is refiled following dismissal without prejudice, dismissal with 17 prejudice is the presumptive sanction for continued failure to comply with the rule). 18 {17} In this case, even if we were to assume that the State’s seven-month delay in 19 submitting the suspected cocaine to a l | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Heffern v. First Interstate Bank
green
2 sentences1986See Baker v. Southern Pacific Transportation, 542 F.2d 1123 (9th Cir.1976); Heffern v. First Interstate Bank, 99 N.M. 531 , 660 P.2d 621 (Ct.App.1983); 3 J. 1986See Baker v. Southern Pacific Transportation, 542 F.2d 1123 (9th Cir.1976); Heffern v. First Interstate Bank, 99 N.M. 531 , 660 P.2d 621 (Ct.App.1983); 3 J. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.