6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Amkco, Ltd., Co. v. Welborngreen2 sentences2026Schs., 1995-NMCA-050 , ¶ 10, 119 15 N.M. 814 , 896 P.2d 494 ; see also Amkco, Co. v. Welborn, 2001-NMSC-012, ¶ 15 , 16 130 N.M. 155 , 21 P.3d 24 (“The de minimis rule is an old legal maxim holding that 17 equity will not involve itself in mere trifles.”). 2026Schs., 1995-NMCA-050 , ¶ 10, 119 15 N.M. 814 , 896 P.2d 494 ; see also Amkco, Co. v. Welborn, 2001-NMSC-012, ¶ 15 , 16 130 N.M. 155 , 21 P.3d 24 (“The de minimis rule is an old legal maxim holding that 17 equity will not involve itself in mere trifles.”). | 2 | 2 |
Fuentes v. Santa Fe Public Schoolsgreen2 sentences2026Schs., 1995-NMCA-050 , ¶ 10, 119 15 N.M. 814 , 896 P.2d 494 ; see also Amkco, Co. v. Welborn, 2001-NMSC-012, ¶ 15 , 16 130 N.M. 155 , 21 P.3d 24 (“The de minimis rule is an old legal maxim holding that 17 equity will not involve itself in mere trifles.”). 2005Sch., 119 N.M. 814, 816-17 , 896 P.2d 494, 496-97 (Ct.App.1995) (discussing the legal doctrine of de minimis). | 1 | 2 |
Snider v. Town of Silver Citygreen2 sentences2001See, e.g., Snider v. Town of Silver City, 56 N.M. 603, 615 , 247 P.2d 178, 186 (1952). 2001See, e.g., Snider v. Town of Silver City, 56 N.M. 603, 615 , 247 P.2d 178, 186 (1952). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Tyree v. Gosa
green
1 sentence2001We have found no authority supporting the compelled conveyance of such a substantial portion of land.” Id. {15} The de minimis rule is an old legal maxim holding that equity will not involve itself in mere trifles. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Morris v. McComb
green
2 sentences1998The issue now is whether this category of activity meets or exceeds the de minimis standard set in Morris v. McComb, 332 U.S. 422 , 68 S.Ct. 131 , 92 L.Ed. 44 (1947). {22} This is where I part company with the majority. 1998The issue now is whether this category of activity meets or exceeds the de minimis standard set in Morris v. McComb, 332 U.S. 422 , 68 S.Ct. 131 , 92 L.Ed. 44 (1947). {22} This is where I part company with the majority. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Pyramid Motor Freight Corp. v. Ispass
green
2 sentences1994The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Employer on the basis that Employee transported goods in interstate commerce “[a]s more than [an] incidental part of his duties.” Employee argues, however, that his transportation of parts interstate in nature was an insubstantial part of his duties, and therefore falls within the de minimis exception of Pyramid, 330 U.S. 695 , 67 S.Ct. 954 . 1994The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Employer on the basis that Employee transported goods in interstate commerce “[a]s more than [an] incidental part of his duties.” Employee argues, however, that his transportation of parts interstate in nature was an insubstantial part of his duties, and therefore falls within the de minimis exception of Pyramid, 330 U.S. 695 , 67 S.Ct. 954 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.