conflict doctrine (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

conflict doctrine in New Mexico

6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2023 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Seckular v. Celotexgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1986 · cited in 2 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007Id.; cf. Seckular v. Celotex, 209 N.J.Super. 242 , 507 A.2d 290, 294, 296-97 (Ct.App.Div.1986) (noting that the situation did not present a false conflict because the outcome was not clear under Florida law; deciding to defer to pending litigation in Florida, in part due to the uncertainty in Florida law). {27} Finally, we rely on Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 , 105 S.Ct. 2965 , 86 L.Ed.2d 628 (1985), which we discuss in more detail later in the opinion.

2007Id.; cf. Seckular v. Celotex, 209 N.J.Super. 242 , 507 A.2d 290, 294, 296-97 (Ct.App.Div.1986) (noting that the situation did not present a false conflict because the outcome was not clear under Florida law; deciding to defer to pending litigation in Florida, in part due to the uncertainty in Florida law). {27} Finally, we rely on Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 , 105 S.Ct. 2965 , 86 L.Ed.2d 628 (1985), which we discuss in more detail later in the opinion.

22
Board of Com'rs of Rio Arriba County v. Greacengreen
nm · 2000 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

11
Tune v. Philip Morris Incorporatedgreen
fladistctapp · 2000 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008“The purpose of the doctrine is to avoid complicated choice-of-law questions when the answer to those questions would not make a difference.” Id. {10} Additionally, some courts will apply the false conflict doctrine “when the policies of one state would be furthered by the application of its laws while the policies] of the other state would not be advanced by the application of its laws.” Tune v. Philip Morris, Inc., 766 So.2d 350, 352 (Fla.Dist.Ct.

2008“The purpose of the doctrine is to avoid complicated choice-of-law questions when the answer to those questions would not make a difference.” Id. {10} Additionally, some courts will apply the false conflict doctrine “when the policies of one state would be furthered by the application of its laws while the policies] of the other state would not be advanced by the application of its laws.” Tune v. Philip Morris, Inc., 766 So.2d 350, 352 (Fla.Dist.Ct.

11
Casuse v. City of Gallupgreen
nm · 1987 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

11
Smith v. City of Santa Fegreen
nmctapp · 2006 · cited in 1 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008See Smith, 2006-NMCA-048, ¶ 17 , 139 N.M. 410 , 133 P.3d 866 (“ ‘[W]hen two statutes that are governmental or regulatory in nature conflict, the law of the sovereign controls.’ ” (quoting Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 )).

2008See Smith, 2006-NMCA-048, ¶ 17 , 139 N.M. 410 , 133 P.3d 866 (“ ‘[W]hen two statutes that are governmental or regulatory in nature conflict, the law of the sovereign controls.’ ” (quoting Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 )).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (1)

CaseNegativeCited
FIRST NAT. BANK IN ALBUQUERQUE v. Bensongreen
nmctapp · 1976 · cited in 2 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007But cf. First Nat'l Bank in Albuquerque v. Benson, 89 N.M. 481, 484 , 553 P.2d 1288, 1291 (Ct.App. 1976) (Hernandez, J., dissenting) (stating that a Supreme Court case did not decide the relevant question because the Supreme Court case actually presented a "false conflict").

2007But cf. First Nat'l Bank in Albuquerque v. Benson, 89 N.M. 481, 484 , 553 P.2d 1288, 1291 (Ct.App. 1976) (Hernandez, J., dissenting) (stating that a Supreme Court case did not decide the relevant question because the Supreme Court case actually presented a "false conflict").

22

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
Fioretti v. Massachusetts General Life Insurance Company green
ca11 · 1995
2 sentences

2007Id. {25} Rejecting the district court's use of the false conflict doctrine, the Eleventh Circuit stated as follows: [T]here is presently not a single reported decision from any state court in these jurisdictions addressing this precise legal issue.

2006Id. {25} Rejecting the district court’s use of the false conflict doctrine, the Eleventh Circuit stated as follows: [T]here is presently not a single reported decision from any state court in these jurisdictions addressing this precise legal issue.

22006–2007
Sun Oil Co. v. Wortman green
scotus · 1988
2 sentences

2007Id. at 731-34 , 108 S.Ct. 2117 . {36} In this case, Plaintiffs cite Shutts for the false conflict rule.

2007Id. at 731-34 , 108 S.Ct. 2117 . {36} In this case, Plaintiffs cite Shutts for the false conflict rule.

22006–2007
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts green
scotus · 1985
2 sentences

2007Id.; cf. Seckular v. Celotex, 209 N.J.Super. 242 , 507 A.2d 290, 294, 296-97 (Ct.App.Div.1986) (noting that the situation did not present a false conflict because the outcome was not clear under Florida law; deciding to defer to pending litigation in Florida, in part due to the uncertainty in Florida law). {27} Finally, we rely on Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 , 105 S.Ct. 2965 , 86 L.Ed.2d 628 (1985), which we discuss in more detail later in the opinion.

2007Id.; cf. Seckular v. Celotex, 209 N.J.Super. 242 , 507 A.2d 290, 294, 296-97 (Ct.App.Div.1986) (noting that the situation did not present a false conflict because the outcome was not clear under Florida law; deciding to defer to pending litigation in Florida, in part due to the uncertainty in Florida law). {27} Finally, we rely on Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 , 105 S.Ct. 2965 , 86 L.Ed.2d 628 (1985), which we discuss in more detail later in the opinion.

22006–2007
State v. Leon green
nmctapp · 2012
1 sentence

2023The “touchstone” of due process is “fundamental fairness.” State v. Leon, 2013-NMCA-011, ¶ 11 , 292 P.3d 493 (noting a “more limited due process right to counsel in probation proceedings”). {8} Here, Defendant does not identify—and the record does not substantiate—a conflict with defense counsel at the time that he admitted to the probation violation in July 2020 that would render his plea fundamentally unfair.

12023–2023
Gould v. Santa Fe County green
nmctapp · 2001
2 sentences

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

2008“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); accord Greacen, 2000-NMSC-016 , ¶ 15, 129 N.M. 177 , 3 P.3d 672 . {49} As an initial matter, we note that the City argues that the district court erred in applying the conflict analysis exemplified in Casuse, 106 N.M. at 573 , 746 P.2d at 1105 , claiming that this Court turned a

12008–2008
New Mexicans for Free Enterprise v. City of Santa Fe green
nmctapp · 2005
2 sentences

2008NMFE, 2006-NMCA-007, ¶¶ 19 , 39-A4, 138 N.M. 785 , 126 P.3d 1149 (“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 )).

2008NMFE, 2006-NMCA-007, ¶¶ 19 , 39-A4, 138 N.M. 785 , 126 P.3d 1149 (“The analysis to apply is whether the stricter requirements of the ordinance conflict with state law, and whether the ordinance permits an act the general law prohibits, or prohibits an act the general law permits.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Gould, 2001-NMCA-107, ¶ 18 , 131 N.M. 405 , 37 P.3d 122 )).

12008–2008
United States Ex Rel. Goldberg v. Daniels green
scotus · 1913
2 sentences

1953In the course of the opinion it was stated: “ * * * Since we- must therefore resolve the conflict in doctrine [right to maintain suits against government officers] we adhere to the rule applied in the Goldberg case [Goldberg v. Daniels, 231 U.S. 218 , 34 S.Ct. 84 , 58 L.Ed. 191 ] and to the principle which has been frequently repeated by this Court, both before and after the Goltra case [Goltra v. Weeks, 271 U.S. 536 , 46 S.Ct. 613 , 70 L.Ed. 1074 ]: the action of an officer of the sovereign (be it holding, taking or otherwise legally affecting the plaintiff’s property) can be regarded as so ‘

1953In the course of the opinion it was stated: “ * * * Since we- must therefore resolve the conflict in doctrine [right to maintain suits against government officers] we adhere to the rule applied in the Goldberg case [Goldberg v. Daniels, 231 U.S. 218 , 34 S.Ct. 84 , 58 L.Ed. 191 ] and to the principle which has been frequently repeated by this Court, both before and after the Goltra case [Goltra v. Weeks, 271 U.S. 536 , 46 S.Ct. 613 , 70 L.Ed. 1074 ]: the action of an officer of the sovereign (be it holding, taking or otherwise legally affecting the plaintiff’s property) can be regarded as so ‘

11953–1953
State of New Mexico v. Backer green
ca10 · 1952
1 sentence

1953In the course of the opinion it was stated: “ * * * Since we- must therefore resolve the conflict in doctrine [right to maintain suits against government officers] we adhere to the rule applied in the Goldberg case [Goldberg v. Daniels, 231 U.S. 218 , 34 S.Ct. 84 , 58 L.Ed. 191 ] and to the principle which has been frequently repeated by this Court, both before and after the Goltra case [Goltra v. Weeks, 271 U.S. 536 , 46 S.Ct. 613 , 70 L.Ed. 1074 ]: the action of an officer of the sovereign (be it holding, taking or otherwise legally affecting the plaintiff’s property) can be regarded as so ‘

11953–1953
Goltra v. Weeks red
scotus · 1926
2 sentences

1953In the course of the opinion it was stated: “ * * * Since we- must therefore resolve the conflict in doctrine [right to maintain suits against government officers] we adhere to the rule applied in the Goldberg case [Goldberg v. Daniels, 231 U.S. 218 , 34 S.Ct. 84 , 58 L.Ed. 191 ] and to the principle which has been frequently repeated by this Court, both before and after the Goltra case [Goltra v. Weeks, 271 U.S. 536 , 46 S.Ct. 613 , 70 L.Ed. 1074 ]: the action of an officer of the sovereign (be it holding, taking or otherwise legally affecting the plaintiff’s property) can be regarded as so ‘

1953In the course of the opinion it was stated: “ * * * Since we- must therefore resolve the conflict in doctrine [right to maintain suits against government officers] we adhere to the rule applied in the Goldberg case [Goldberg v. Daniels, 231 U.S. 218 , 34 S.Ct. 84 , 58 L.Ed. 191 ] and to the principle which has been frequently repeated by this Court, both before and after the Goltra case [Goltra v. Weeks, 271 U.S. 536 , 46 S.Ct. 613 , 70 L.Ed. 1074 ]: the action of an officer of the sovereign (be it holding, taking or otherwise legally affecting the plaintiff’s property) can be regarded as so ‘

11953–1953

Where else courts name it

CA 39 (1931–2023) TX 18 (1915–2025) OH 16 (1986–2023) IL 14 (1888–2023) NY 12 (1961–2023) WA 12 (1997–2023) CO 8 (2002–2026) MD 7 (1981–2026) MO 7 (1993–2023) PA 7 (1975–2024) FL 6 (1987–2024) NM 6 (1953–2023) NC 6 (2001–2022) MI 6 (1976–2013) NJ 6 (1978–2025) MN 5 (1990–2016) IA 5 (1918–2022) LA 4 (2000–2009) DC 4 (1982–2016) NV 4 (1980–2017) ID 3 (1962–1991) UT 3 (1990–2024) NE 3 (1992–2016) WI 3 (1984–2014) AK 3 (1967–2019) VA 3 (1891–2018) CT 3 (1997–2016) AL 3 (1984–1999) MA 2 (2015–2025) KS 2 (1903–1999) MS 2 (1998–2006) AZ 2 (1986–2008) ME 2 (1854–1970) VT 2 (2010–2013) SD 2 (2008–2014) IN 2 (1981–2007) KY 2 (1918–2019) AR 2 (1933–2002) GA 2 (2011–2011)

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