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.
7 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1933–2023 1 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. Fuentesgreen2 sentences2017See 14 1 State v. Fuentes, 2010-NMCA-027, ¶ 29 , 147 N.M. 761 , 228 P.3d 1181 (noting that 2 we will “not review unclear or undeveloped arguments [that] require us to guess at 3 what [a party’s] arguments might be”). 2017See 14 1 State v. Fuentes, 2010-NMCA-027, ¶ 29 , 147 N.M. 761 , 228 P.3d 1181 (noting that 2 we will “not review unclear or undeveloped arguments [that] require us to guess at 3 what [a party’s] arguments might be”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gonzalesgreen1 sentence2015See Gonzales, 2011-NMCA-007, ¶ 19 (“[T]his 2 Court has no duty to review an argument that is not adequately developed.”). 3 {19} As well, we reiterate that it is the district court’s responsibility to equalize the 4 division of assets and liabilities, particularly given that not all things are perfectly 5 suited to division. | 1 | 1 |
Salinas v. John Deere Co.green1 sentence1990See Salinas v. John Deere Co., 103 N.M. 336, 339 , 707 P.2d 27, 30 (Ct.App.) (“A mere assertion that an instruction does not state the law is insufficient.”), cert. quashed, 103 N.M. 287 , 705 P.2d 1138 (1985); McNeely v. Henry, 100 N.M. 794, 799 , 676 P.2d 1359, 1364 (Ct.App.1984) (To preserve error on appeal “[i]t is necessary to submit a correct instruction or form of verdict for the court’s consideration below.”). | 1 | 1 |
Salinas v. John Deere Co., Inc.green1 sentence1990See Salinas v. John Deere Co., 103 N.M. 336, 339 , 707 P.2d 27, 30 (Ct.App.) (“A mere assertion that an instruction does not state the law is insufficient.”), cert. quashed, 103 N.M. 287 , 705 P.2d 1138 (1985); McNeely v. Henry, 100 N.M. 794, 799 , 676 P.2d 1359, 1364 (Ct.App.1984) (To preserve error on appeal “[i]t is necessary to submit a correct instruction or form of verdict for the court’s consideration below.”). | 1 | 1 |
McNeely v. Henrygreen2 sentences1990See Salinas v. John Deere Co., 103 N.M. 336, 339 , 707 P.2d 27, 30 (Ct.App.) (“A mere assertion that an instruction does not state the law is insufficient.”), cert. quashed, 103 N.M. 287 , 705 P.2d 1138 (1985); McNeely v. Henry, 100 N.M. 794, 799 , 676 P.2d 1359, 1364 (Ct.App.1984) (To preserve error on appeal “[i]t is necessary to submit a correct instruction or form of verdict for the court’s consideration below.”). 1990See Salinas v. John Deere Co., 103 N.M. 336, 339 , 707 P.2d 27, 30 (Ct.App.) (“A mere assertion that an instruction does not state the law is insufficient.”), cert. quashed, 103 N.M. 287 , 705 P.2d 1138 (1985); McNeely v. Henry, 100 N.M. 794, 799 , 676 P.2d 1359, 1364 (Ct.App.1984) (To preserve error on appeal “[i]t is necessary to submit a correct instruction or form of verdict for the court’s consideration below.”). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
McBee v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY. CO.
green
2 sentences1985McBee v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 80 N.M. 468 , 457 P.2d 987 (Ct.App.1969). 1985McBee v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 80 N.M. 468 , 457 P.2d 987 (Ct.App.1969). | 2 | 1984–1985 |
Pirtle v. Legis. Council
green
2 sentences2023Legislature, 2021-NMSC-026, ¶ 58 , 492 P.3d 586 (stating that, as an appellate court, we rely on documents presented to us to “decide legal issues and avoid reaching out to construct legal arguments that the parties, intentionally or otherwise, have not presented”). {7} We emphasize to Petitioner that the mere assertion of error is not a sufficient showing of error that requires reversal. 2023Legislature, 2021-NMSC-026, ¶ 58 , 492 P.3d 586 (stating that, as an appellate court, we rely on documents presented to us to “decide legal issues and avoid reaching out to construct legal arguments that the parties, intentionally or otherwise, have not presented”). {7} We emphasize to Petitioner that the mere assertion of error is not a sufficient showing of error that requires reversal. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Hillerich v. Franklin Ins.
green
2 sentences1933Co., 111 Ky. 255 , 63 S. W. 592, 593 , it was said: “The question, and the sole question is, whether the mere assertion of a claim upon the ground that it is covered and included in a contract a& written is so inconsistent with a claim, that the contract be so reformed as to include and cover such relief as to make it a conclusive election of the remedy, and bar the plaintiff of any right to seek relief upon the ground of mistake in the drawing of the written contract. 1933Co., 111 Ky. 255 , 63 S. W. 592, 593 , it was said: “The question, and the sole question is, whether the mere assertion of a claim upon the ground that it is covered and included in a contract a& written is so inconsistent with a claim, that the contract be so reformed as to include and cover such relief as to make it a conclusive election of the remedy, and bar the plaintiff of any right to seek relief upon the ground of mistake in the drawing of the written contract. | 1 | 1933–1933 |
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.