contract without the unconscionable clause (New Mexico) · Go Syfert
← New Mexico issues

contract without the unconscionable clause in New Mexico

6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 2012–2017 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Fiser v. Dell Computer Corporationgreen
nm · 2008 · cited in 3 New Mexico opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012When a provision of a contract is deemed unconscionable, “we may refuse to enforce the contract, or we may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or we may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.” See Fiser, 2008-NMSC-046, ¶ 24 (alterations, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted).

2012We agree. {38} When a provision of a contract is deemed unconscionable, “we may refuse to enforce the contract, or we may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or we may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.” See Fiser, 2008-NMSC-046, ¶ 24 (alterations, internal quotation marks, and citation omitted).

33

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
Cordova v. World Finance Corp. of NM green
nm · 2009
2 sentences

2017Corp. of N.M., 2009-NMSC-021, ¶ 21 , 146 N.M. 256 , 208 5 P.3d 901 ; see also NMSA 1978, § 55-2-302(1) (1961) (“If the court as a matter of law 6 finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time 7 it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the 8 remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the 9 application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.”). 10 Unconscionability is a legal question that we review de novo.

2017Corp. of N.M., 2009-NMSC-021, ¶ 21 , 146 N.M. 256 , 208 5 P.3d 901 ; see also NMSA 1978, § 55-2-302(1) (1961) (“If the court as a matter of law 6 finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time 7 it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the 8 remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the 9 application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.”). 10 Unconscionability is a legal question that we review de novo.

32016–2017

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NM § N.M. Stat. § 44-7A-1 (4) NM § N.M. Stat. § 44-7A-5 (4) USC § 9u.s.c.1-6 (4) NM § N.M. Stat. § 44-7A-22 (3) NM § N.M. Stat. § 44-7A-23 (3) NM § N.M. Stat. § 44-7A-29 (3) NM § N.M. Stat. § 45-5A-102 (3) NM § N.M. Stat. § 47-8-3 (3) NM § N.M. Stat. § 55-2-302 (3) USC § 9u.s.c.1-2 (3) USC § 9u.s.c.2 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 81 (1988–2026) MS 9 (2004–2014) NM 6 (2012–2017) WV 5 (1984–2025) NY 5 (1966–1984) NJ 3 (1971–2026) WA 3 (1982–2009) SC 2 (2022–2023) MO 2 (2006–2010) GA 2 (1974–2024) PA 2 (1977–2007) CT 2 (1979–1993) MI 2 (1978–2022)

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