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 1963–1995 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 |
|---|---|---|
Allstate Insurance v. Jensengreen2 sentences1995In Jensen we held that an omnibus clause to an insurance policy “must provide coverage to any person using the insured vehicle with the owner’s consent, without regard to any restrictions or understanding between the parties on the particular use for which the permission was given.” 109 N.M. at 587 , 788 P.2d at 343 (emphasis added). 1995In Jensen we held that an omnibus clause to an insurance policy “must provide coverage to any person using the insured vehicle with the owner’s consent, without regard to any restrictions or understanding between the parties on the particular use for which the permission was given.” 109 N.M. at 587 , 788 P.2d at 343 (emphasis added). | 1 | 2 |
American Indemnity Company v. C. E. Davisgreen1 sentence1963See Robinson v. Georgia Casualty & Surety Co., 235 S.C. 178 , 110 S.E.2d 255 ; compare American Indemnity Co. v. Davis (5th Cir.1958) 260 F.2d 440 . | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co.green2 sentences1963See Robinson v. Georgia Casualty & Surety Co., 235 S.C. 178 , 110 S.E.2d 255 ; compare American Indemnity Co. v. Davis (5th Cir.1958) 260 F.2d 440 . 1963See Robinson v. Georgia Casualty & Surety Co., 235 S.C. 178 , 110 S.E.2d 255 ; compare American Indemnity Co. v. Davis (5th Cir.1958) 260 F.2d 440 . | 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 |
|---|---|---|
David Lazarus v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company, a Body Corporate
green
2 sentences1971Co., 105 App.D.C. 357 , 267 F.2d 634 (1959). 1971Co, 105 App.D.C. 357 , 267 F.2d 634 (1959). | 2 | 1971–1971 |
INDEMNITY INS. CO., ETC. v. Metropolitan Cas. Ins. Co.
green
1 sentence1995Similar to our task in this case, the New Jersey court interpreted an omnibus clause that extended coverage to “any person while using the automobile ... provided the actual use is with ... [the named insured’s] permission.” Id. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Gruger v. Western Casualty & Surety Co.
neutral
2 sentences1995Id. at 563 , 555 P.2d at 684 . 1995Id. at 563 , 555 P.2d at 684 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Barela v. De Baca
neutral
2 sentences1981Atlantic claimed that this issue had been resolved in the prior case of Barela v. De Baca, 68 N.M. 104 , 359 P.2d 138 (1961). 1981Atlantic claimed that this issue had been resolved in the prior case of Barela v. De Baca, 68 N.M. 104 , 359 P.2d 138 (1961). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Hinchey v. Sellers
green
2 sentences1963Appellee cites Hinchey v. Sellers, 7 N.Y.2d 287 , 197 N.Y.S.2d 129 , 165 N.E.2d 156 , which we feel is clearly distinguishable from the case before us. 1963Appellee cites Hinchey v. Sellers, 7 N.Y.2d 287 , 197 N.Y.S.2d 129 , 165 N.E.2d 156 , which we feel is clearly distinguishable from the case before us. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
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.