13 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Bacagreen2 sentences2024“Actual bias is bias in fact,” and is proven when the opponent of a juror establishes “that the bias would actually affect the juror’s vote.” Id. ¶ 9; see also State v. Baca, 1983- NMSC-049, ¶ 9, 99 N.M. 754 , 664 P.2d 360 (“The burden of establishing partiality is upon the party making such a claim.”), overruled on other grounds by Martinez, 2012- NMSC-002. 2024“Actual bias is bias in fact,” and is proven when the opponent of a juror establishes “that the bias would actually affect the juror’s vote.” Id. ¶ 9; see also State v. Baca, 1983- NMSC-049, ¶ 9, 99 N.M. 754 , 664 P.2d 360 (“The burden of establishing partiality is upon the party making such a claim.”), overruled on other grounds by Martinez, 2012- NMSC-002. | 3 | 6 |
Irvin v. Dowdgreen2 sentences1983Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961). 1983Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961). | 1 | 2 |
Encinias v. Whitener Law Firm, P.A.green1 sentence2019See Encinias v. Whitener Law Firm, P.A., 2013-NMSC-045, ¶ 21 , 310 P.3d 611 (“[N]ominal and punitive damages are not available in a negligence action absent proof of actual damages.”); see also UJI 13-1827 NMRA (“[The jury] may consider punitive damages only if [it] find[s] that [the party making the claim] should recover compensatory . . . damages.”). {49} In sum, we see no basis for reversal of the district court’s rulings or for a new trial, and turn next to Defendants’ appeal of the district court’s rulings on costs. | 1 | 1 |
Garcia v. Middle Rio Grande Conservancy Districtgreen2 sentences2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that 2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that | 1 | 1 |
Handmaker v. Henneygreen2 sentences2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that 2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that | 1 | 1 |
C.R. Anthony Co. v. Loretto Mall Partnersgreen2 sentences2004Anthony Co. v. Loretto Mall Partners, 112 N.M. 504, 509 , 817 P.2d 238, 243 (1991), then simply concluding “that the dispute involves a term of the contract as contemplated in Handmaker.” Opinion ¶ 12. 2004Anthony Co. v. Loretto Mall Partners, 112 N.M. 504, 509 , 817 P.2d 238, 243 (1991), then simply concluding “that the dispute involves a term of the contract as contemplated in Handmaker.” Opinion ¶ 12. | 1 | 1 |
St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicksgreen2 sentences2002Id. at 506, 515 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 . {24} In other types of cases where courts have found sufficient evidence to support a prima facie case, that evidence, standing alone, does not prove that the party making the challenge was actually engaging in discrimination. 2002Id. at 506, 515 , 113 S.Ct. 2742 . {24} In other types of cases where courts have found sufficient evidence to support a prima facie case, that evidence, standing alone, does not prove that the party making the challenge was actually engaging in discrimination. | 1 | 1 |
Reinhart v. Rauscher Pierce Securities Corp.green2 sentences1997See Reinhart, 83 N.M. at 198 , 490 P.2d at 244 . 1997See Reinhart, 83 N.M. at 198 , 490 P.2d at 244 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Campos De Suenos, Ltd. v. County of Bernalillogreen2 sentences2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that 2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Singleton
green
2 sentences2013See State v. Baca, 1983-NMSC-049 , ¶ 9, 99 N.M. 754 , 664 P.2d 360 (“The burden of establishing partiality [of a juror] is upon the party making such a claim.”); State v. Singleton, 2001-NMCA-054, ¶ 19 , 130 N.M. 583 , 28 P.3d 1124 (rejecting a defendant’s claim of fundamental error because the “[djefendant has not shown that he was prejudiced in any way by the juror’s excusal”). 2013See State v. Baca, 1983-NMSC-049 , ¶ 9, 99 N.M. 754 , 664 P.2d 360 (“The burden of establishing partiality [of a juror] is upon the party making such a claim.”); State v. Singleton, 2001-NMCA-054, ¶ 19 , 130 N.M. 583 , 28 P.3d 1124 (rejecting a defendant’s claim of fundamental error because the “[djefendant has not shown that he was prejudiced in any way by the juror’s excusal”). | 2 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Wiberg
green
2 sentences2023Defendant cites State v. Wiberg, 1988-NMCA-022 , 107 N.M. 152 , 754 P.2d 529 , seemingly to support his proposition that the district court had a duty to inquire whether Juror Five’s “undue hardship would have any effect on his ability to remain fair and impartial.” As Defendant points out in his briefing to this Court, however, “[t]he burden of establishing partiality is upon the party making the claim.” Wiberg, 1988-NMCA-022 , ¶ 21. 2023Defendant cites State v. Wiberg, 1988-NMCA-022 , 107 N.M. 152 , 754 P.2d 529 , seemingly to support his proposition that the district court had a duty to inquire whether Juror Five’s “undue hardship would have any effect on his ability to remain fair and impartial.” As Defendant points out in his briefing to this Court, however, “[t]he burden of establishing partiality is upon the party making the claim.” Wiberg, 1988-NMCA-022 , ¶ 21. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Treloar v. County of Chaves
green
2 sentences2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that 2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Silva v. Town of Springer
green
2 sentences2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that 2004See Handmaker v. Henney, 1999-NMSC-043, ¶ 17 , 128 N.M. 328 , 992 P.2d 879 (appearing to state that immunity could be or was waived where the position from which the plaintiff was terminated was included in his written employment contract even though the position was not specifically mentioned in the contract); Treloar v. County of Chaves, 2001-NMCA-074, ¶¶ 15-17 , 130 N.M. 794 , 32 P.3d 803 (holding county not immune from physician’s claim of breach of employment contract where physician had a written contract with hospital but not with county, but where county assumed the obligations of that | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Ford
green
2 sentences1981See Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1960); State v. Cutnose, supra; and State v. Ford, 81 N.M. 556 , 469 P.2d 535 (Ct.App.1970). 1981See Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717 , 81 S.Ct. 1639 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1960); State v. Cutnose, supra; and State v. Ford, 81 N.M. 556 , 469 P.2d 535 (Ct.App.1970). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.