after hearing (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

after hearing in New Mexico

7 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2024 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Lee v. Martinezgreen
nm · 2004 · cited in 2 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024See Lee v. Martinez, 2004-NMSC-027 , 20 ¶ 12, 136 N.M. 166 , 96 P.3d 291 ; see also Rule 1-053(E)(2) (“The court after hearing 30 1 may adopt the [master’s] report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part 2 or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.”).

2024See Lee v. Martinez, 2004-NMSC-027 , 20 ¶ 12, 136 N.M. 166 , 96 P.3d 291 ; see also Rule 1-053(E)(2) (“The court after hearing 30 1 may adopt the [master’s] report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part 2 or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.”).

22
State v. Franklingreen
nm · 1967 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013First, she argues that the district court 8 erred by denying her a continuance of the trial after a defense witness, Arnold Cline, 9 failed to appear. [DS 6; MIO 6-8] Second, pursuant to the demands of State v. 10 Franklin, 78 N.M. 127, 129 , 428 P.2d 982, 984 (1967), and State v. Boyer, 103 N.M. 11 655, 658-60, 712 P.2d 1, 4-6 (Ct. App. 1985), Defendant challenges the sufficiency 12 of the State’s evidence to support her conviction for voluntary manslaughter and the 13 sufficiency of the State’s evidence to rebut her theory of self-defense. [DS 7; MIO 8- 14 12] 15 Denial of a Continuance 16 I

2013First, she argues that the district court 8 erred by denying her a continuance of the trial after a defense witness, Arnold Cline, 9 failed to appear. [DS 6; MIO 6-8] Second, pursuant to the demands of State v. 10 Franklin, 78 N.M. 127, 129 , 428 P.2d 982, 984 (1967), and State v. Boyer, 103 N.M. 11 655, 658-60, 712 P.2d 1, 4-6 (Ct. App. 1985), Defendant challenges the sufficiency 12 of the State’s evidence to support her conviction for voluntary manslaughter and the 13 sufficiency of the State’s evidence to rebut her theory of self-defense. [DS 7; MIO 8- 14 12] 15 Denial of a Continuance 16 I

11
State v. Boyergreen
nmctapp · 1985 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013First, she argues that the district court 8 erred by denying her a continuance of the trial after a defense witness, Arnold Cline, 9 failed to appear. [DS 6; MIO 6-8] Second, pursuant to the demands of State v. 10 Franklin, 78 N.M. 127, 129 , 428 P.2d 982, 984 (1967), and State v. Boyer, 103 N.M. 11 655, 658-60, 712 P.2d 1, 4-6 (Ct. App. 1985), Defendant challenges the sufficiency 12 of the State’s evidence to support her conviction for voluntary manslaughter and the 13 sufficiency of the State’s evidence to rebut her theory of self-defense. [DS 7; MIO 8- 14 12] 15 Denial of a Continuance 16 I

11
State v. Olguingreen
nmctapp · 1975 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978
2 sentences

1978Jane Doe says: It is implicit in the language of the Children’s Code that the Children’s Court is vested with a broad discretion in hearing and deciding matters under it . [88 N.M. at 511, 542 P.2d at 1201.] This rule was made applicable to a decision of the Children’s Court after a hearing was held.

1978Jane Doe says: It is implicit in the language of the Children’s Code that the Children’s Court is vested with a broad discretion in hearing and deciding matters under it . [88 N.M. at 511, 542 P.2d at 1201.] This rule was made applicable to a decision of the Children’s Court after a hearing was held.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Mexico. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Martinez v. Friede green
nm · 2004
2 sentences

2004Therefore, it is clear that in reviewing Judge Knowles’ conclusions of law, “we exercise our own independent judgment without assigning special weight to [his] decision.” Martinez v. Friede, 2004-NMSC-006, ¶ 10 , 135 N.M. 171 , 86 P.3d 596 . {13} It is less clear the standard of review that we should apply to Judge Knowles’ findings of fact.

2004Therefore, it is clear that in reviewing Judge Knowles’ conclusions of law, “we exercise our own independent judgment without assigning special weight to [his] decision.” Martinez v. Friede, 2004-NMSC-006, ¶ 10 , 135 N.M. 171 , 86 P.3d 596 . {13} It is less clear the standard of review that we should apply to Judge Knowles’ findings of fact.

12004–2004
Lozano v. GTE Lenkurt, Inc. green
nmctapp · 1996
2 sentences

2004Lozano, 1996— NMCA-074, ¶ 18, 122 N.M. 103 , 920 P.2d 1057 ; see also Rule 1-053(E)(2) (“The court after hearing may adopt the [master’s] report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.”).

2004Lozano, 1996— NMCA-074, ¶ 18, 122 N.M. 103 , 920 P.2d 1057 ; see also Rule 1-053(E)(2) (“The court after hearing may adopt the [master’s] report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.”).

12004–2004
Stone v. Stone green
nm · 1968
2 sentences

1975Stone v. Stone, 79 N.M. 351 , 443 P.2d 741 (1968).

1975Stone v. Stone, 79 N.M. 351 , 443 P.2d 741 (1968).

11975–1975
Hopper v. Reynolds green
nm · 1970
2 sentences

1970The court must interpret and enforce the contract which the parties made for themselves. * * * ” In accord are, Brown v. American Bank of Commerce, 79 N.M. 222 , 441 P.2d 751 (1968); and Hopper v. Reynolds, 81 N.M. 255 , 466 P.2d 101 (1970).

1970The court must interpret and enforce the contract which the parties made for themselves. * * * ” In accord are, Brown v. American Bank of Commerce, 79 N.M. 222 , 441 P.2d 751 (1968); and Hopper v. Reynolds, 81 N.M. 255 , 466 P.2d 101 (1970).

11970–1970
Brown v. American Bank of Commerce green
nm · 1968
2 sentences

1970The court must interpret and enforce the contract which the parties made for themselves. * * * ” In accord are, Brown v. American Bank of Commerce, 79 N.M. 222 , 441 P.2d 751 (1968); and Hopper v. Reynolds, 81 N.M. 255 , 466 P.2d 101 (1970).

1970The court must interpret and enforce the contract which the parties made for themselves. * * * ” In accord are, Brown v. American Bank of Commerce, 79 N.M. 222 , 441 P.2d 751 (1968); and Hopper v. Reynolds, 81 N.M. 255 , 466 P.2d 101 (1970).

11970–1970
Davis v. Merrick green
nm · 1959
2 sentences

1970The court after hearing may adopt the report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.” In Davis v. Merrick, 66 N.M. 226 , 345 P.2d 1042 (1959), this court said: “* * * [I]t is not the province of the court to amend or alter the contract by construction.

1970The court after hearing may adopt the report or may modify it or may reject it in whole or in part or may receive further evidence or may recommit it with instructions.” In Davis v. Merrick, 66 N.M. 226 , 345 P.2d 1042 (1959), this court said: “* * * [I]t is not the province of the court to amend or alter the contract by construction.

11970–1970

Where else courts name it

PA 96 (1905–2025) CA 44 (1912–2026) TX 42 (1925–2018) AL 41 (1849–2025) NY 27 (1926–2024) IL 27 (1869–2024) OK 19 (1904–2010) OH 18 (1996–2026) KS 18 (1930–2026) LA 16 (1935–2022) GA 16 (1924–2024) FL 14 (1919–2018) MO 12 (1911–2024) AK 12 (1979–2021) MI 12 (1912–2024) IN 11 (1916–2016) CT 9 (1903–2026) ND 9 (1996–2018) WA 8 (1929–2025) KY 8 (1908–2024) MD 8 (1936–2015) NJ 8 (1893–2021) NM 7 (1970–2024) DC 7 (1970–1996) OR 6 (1950–2018) VT 6 (1942–2023) NE 6 (1956–2016) NC 5 (1915–2025) UT 5 (1938–2023) MA 5 (1930–1990) VA 4 (1959–2010) RI 4 (1919–2009) CO 4 (1943–2025) AZ 3 (1971–2023) ME 3 (1976–2019) WI 3 (1994–2020) MN 3 (2002–2006) MS 3 (1975–1995) TN 3 (1944–2010) IA 2 (1953–2003) MT 2 (1909–2001) WV 2 (1918–2003)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check