6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1902–1992 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 |
|---|---|---|
Budagher v. Amrep Corp.green2 sentences1992See Budagher, 97 N.M. at 118-21 , 637 P.2d at 549-52 (“Once the judge accepted Amrep’s defense of independent contractor, he should have realized that the exceptions to the general rule of independent contractors [were] applicable.”). 1992See Budagher, 97 N.M. at 118-21 , 637 P.2d at 549-52 (“Once the judge accepted Amrep’s defense of independent contractor, he should have realized that the exceptions to the general rule of independent contractors [were] applicable.”). | 1 | 1 |
New Mexico Department of Human Services v. Tapiagreen2 sentences1992The exceptions to the general rule of addressing only those issues raised by the parties, both below and on appeal, should be applied sparingly and “only where there could be no valid reason for the lower court’s action.” New Mexico Dep’t of Human Servs., Income Support Div. v. Tapia, 97 N.M. 632, 634 , 642 P.2d 1091, 1093 (1982). 1992The exceptions to the general rule of addressing only those issues raised by the parties, both below and on appeal, should be applied sparingly and “only where there could be no valid reason for the lower court’s action.” New Mexico Dep’t of Human Servs., Income Support Div. v. Tapia, 97 N.M. 632, 634 , 642 P.2d 1091, 1093 (1982). | 1 | 1 |
Gregg v. Gardnergreen2 sentences1986See Id. at 360 , 388 P.2d at 77-78 . 1986See Id. at 360 , 388 P.2d at 77-78 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bassettgreen2 sentences1974The exceptions to the general rule were stated in State v. Bassett, 26 N.M. 476, 478 , 194 P. 867, 868 (1921). 1974The exceptions to the general rule were stated in State v. Bassett, 26 N.M. 476, 478 , 194 P. 867, 868 (1921). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Oak Distributing Co. v. Miller Brewing Company
green
2 sentences1977A case which is strikingly similar to the present situation is Oak Distributing Co. v. Miller Brewing Company, 370 F. Supp. 889 (S.D.Mich. 1973) wherein the plaintiffs alleged that their distributorships were wrongfully terminated when Miller purchased Meister Brau, Inc. with whom the plaintiffs had had their original distribution agreement. 1977A case which is strikingly similar to the present situation is Oak Distributing Co. v. Miller Brewing Company, 370 F.Supp. 889 (S.D.Mich.1973) wherein the plaintiffs alleged that their distributorships were wrongfully terminated when Miller purchased Meister Brau, Inc. with whom the plaintiffs had had their original distribution agreement. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Starr
green
2 sentences1974The court said: The so-called exceptions to the general rule have been stated to be that where the proof of other acts or crimes tends to establish motive, intent, absence of a mistake or accident, a common scheme or plan, or the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial, it is admissible. . [Emphasis added.] Rule 404(b), supra, is almost identical with the exception rule stated in State v. Bassett, supra. It is a common law rule that has been followed in New Mexico for over half a century, beginning with State v. Starr, 24 N.M. 180 , 173 P. 674 (1918), and endin 1974The court said: The so-called exceptions to the general rule have been stated to be that where the proof of other acts or crimes tends to establish motive, intent, absence of a mistake or accident, a common scheme or plan, or the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial, it is admissible. . [Emphasis added.] Rule 404(b), supra, is almost identical with the exception rule stated in State v. Bassett, supra. It is a common law rule that has been followed in New Mexico for over half a century, beginning with State v. Starr, 24 N.M. 180 , 173 P. 674 (1918), and endin | 1 | 1974–1974 |
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences1974The court said: The so-called exceptions to the general rule have been stated to be that where the proof of other acts or crimes tends to establish motive, intent, absence of a mistake or accident, a common scheme or plan, or the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial, it is admissible. . [Emphasis added.] Rule 404(b), supra, is almost identical with the exception rule stated in State v. Bassett, supra. It is a common law rule that has been followed in New Mexico for over half a century, beginning with State v. Starr, 24 N.M. 180 , 173 P. 674 (1918), and endin 1974The court said: The so-called exceptions to the general rule have been stated to be that where the proof of other acts or crimes tends to establish motive, intent, absence of a mistake or accident, a common scheme or plan, or the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial, it is admissible. . [Emphasis added.] Rule 404(b), supra, is almost identical with the exception rule stated in State v. Bassett, supra. It is a common law rule that has been followed in New Mexico for over half a century, beginning with State v. Starr, 24 N.M. 180 , 173 P. 674 (1918), and endin | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Neher v. Armijo
green
1 sentence1902It is likewise to be understood that we recognize the exceptions to the general rule which authorizes this court to notice without exceptions or presentation jurisdictional and other matters which may render a case inherently and fatally defective, and require a reversal.” Neher v. Armijo, 66 Pac. 517 . | 1 | 1902–1902 |
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.