8 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1967–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Coopergreen2 sentences2016Four fact 5 witnesses testified for the State about the circumstances surrounding Bregar’s 6 confession, and Bregar called a fifth witness to testify as an expert in “general nursing” 7 regarding Bregar’s injuries and mental state at the time of the interview—i.e., explaining 8 “how [Bregar] reacted to the external facts.” Cooper, 1997-NMSC-058, ¶ 27 (internal 9 quotation marks and citation omitted). 2016Four fact witnesses testified for the State about the circumstances surrounding Bregar’s confession, and Bregar called a fifth witness to testify as an expert in “general nursing” regarding Bregar’s injuries and mental state at the time of the interview—i.e., explaining “how [Bregar] reacted to the external facts.” Cooper, 1997-NMSC-058, ¶ 27 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Kilgore v. FUJI HEAVY INDUSTRIES LTD.green1 sentence2017Nor is there any reason to believe that the owner’s 8 statement reached another member of the jury.” Kilgore, 2009-NMCA-078, ¶¶ 24, 30 . 9 2. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
PDK Laboratories Inc. v. United States Drug Enforcement Administration
green
1 sentence2018Inc. v. U.S. DEA , 362 F.3d 786 , 799 (D.C. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
United States v. MacDonald
green
2 sentences2005Id. at 4-5 , 102 S.Ct. 1497 . 2005Id. at 4-5 , 102 S.Ct. 1497 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Huntington National Bank v. Sproul
green
2 sentences2003Sproul, 116 N.M. at 258-61 , 861 P.2d at 939-42 ; see § 40-3-9. 2003Sproul, 116 N.M. at 258-61 , 861 P.2d at 939-42 ; see § 40-3-9. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Stang v. Hertz Corporation
green
2 sentences1982In a lengthy analysis of the development of strict liability, we noted that the theory was adopted "[b]ecause of the shortcomings of the early theories * * *." Stang, supra at *738 731, 497 P.2d at 733 . 1982In a lengthy analysis of the development of strict liability, we noted that the theory was adopted “[bjecause of the shortcomings of the early theories * * Stang, supra at 731 , 497 P.2d at 733 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Baros v. Kazmierczwk
green
2 sentences1967Baros v. Kazmierczwk, 68 N.M. 421 , 362 P.2d 798 ; Meeker v. Walraven, 72 N.M. 107 , 380 P.2d 845 . 1967Baros v. Kazmierczwk, 68 N.M. 421 , 362 P.2d 798 ; Meeker v. Walraven, 72 N.M. 107 , 380 P.2d 845 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Meeker v. Walraven
neutral
2 sentences1967Baros v. Kazmierczwk, 68 N.M. 421 , 362 P.2d 798 ; Meeker v. Walraven, 72 N.M. 107 , 380 P.2d 845 . 1967Baros v. Kazmierczwk, 68 N.M. 421 , 362 P.2d 798 ; Meeker v. Walraven, 72 N.M. 107 , 380 P.2d 845 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
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.