6 New Mexico opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Badgergreen2 sentences2011In State v. Badger, two roommates were convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. 96 Idaho 168 , 525 P.2d 363, 364 (1974). 2011In State v. Badger, two roommates were convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. 96 Idaho 168 , 525 P.2d 363, 364 (1974). | 1 | 1 |
McIntosh v. Murphygreen1 sentence2010See McIntosh, 469 P.2d at 179 . {16} This case involves the fourth section of the English statute of frauds, which in pertinent part states, No action shall be brought upon any contract or sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them ... unless the agreement upon which such action shall be brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, shall be in writing, signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully authorized. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Blackred2 sentences2005Cf. Black, 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 740 , 113 P.3d at 543-44 ("The judge's discretion to identify aggravating factors in a case is guided by the requirement that they be `reasonably related to the decision being made.'") (quoting California court rules). 2005Cf. Black, 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 740 , 113 P.3d at 543-44 ("The judge's discretion to identify aggravating factors in a case is guided by the requirement that they be `reasonably related to the decision being made.'") (quoting California court rules). | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Estate of Mooregreen2 sentences1985McDonald v. Polansky, 48 N.M. 518 , 153 P.2d 670 (1944) (Justice Mabry quoted with approval from 4 Page on Wills, § 1711, the rule that “a contract to make a will must, in order to be enforceable, ‘be clearly proved and be certain and unambiguous in all its terms’ ”); see Matter of Estate of Moore, 137 Ariz. 176 , 669 P.2d 609 (1983). 1985McDonald v. Polansky, 48 N.M. 518 , 153 P.2d 670 (1944) (Justice Mabry quoted with approval from 4 Page on Wills, § 1711, the rule that “a contract to make a will must, in order to be enforceable, ‘be clearly proved and be certain and unambiguous in all its terms’ ”); see Matter of Estate of Moore, 137 Ariz. 176 , 669 P.2d 609 (1983). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
green
2 sentences2010Although a signed written rejection is not required, see Marckstadt, 2010-NMSC-001, ¶ 24 , 147 N.M. 678 , 228 P.3d 462 , a signature is one way to meet the writing requirement. 2010Although a signed written rejection is not required, see Marckstadt, 2010-NMSC-001, ¶ 24 , 147 N.M. 678 , 228 P.3d 462 , a signature is one way to meet the writing requirement. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences2007Lopez, 2005-NMSC-036, ¶ 40 , 138 N.M. 521 , 123 P.3d 754 (citation omitted). 2007Lopez, 2005-NMSC-036, ¶ 40 , 138 N.M. 521 , 123 P.3d 754 (citation omitted). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
McDonald v. Polansky
green
2 sentences1985McDonald v. Polansky, 48 N.M. 518 , 153 P.2d 670 (1944) (Justice Mabry quoted with approval from 4 Page on Wills, § 1711, the rule that “a contract to make a will must, in order to be enforceable, ‘be clearly proved and be certain and unambiguous in all its terms’ ”); see Matter of Estate of Moore, 137 Ariz. 176 , 669 P.2d 609 (1983). 1985McDonald v. Polansky, 48 N.M. 518 , 153 P.2d 670 (1944) (Justice Mabry quoted with approval from 4 Page on Wills, § 1711, the rule that “a contract to make a will must, in order to be enforceable, ‘be clearly proved and be certain and unambiguous in all its terms’ ”); see Matter of Estate of Moore, 137 Ariz. 176 , 669 P.2d 609 (1983). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Lindley v. Lindley
green
2 sentences1985In Lindley v. Lindley, 67 N.M. 439 , 356 P.2d 455 (1960), the court noted that for “reasons of public policy, courts should be cautious to sustain contracts to make mutual wills, because such contracts, in effect destroy the revocability of wills, and fail to allow for changes in circumstances as years pass.” New Mexico’s adoption of Section 45-2-701 effectively creates a mini-statute of frauds for contracts to make wills and adds a writing requirement to the common-law rule that a contract to make a will must be clearly established and be certain and unambiguous in its terms. 1985In Lindley v. Lindley, 67 N.M. 439 , 356 P.2d 455 (1960), the court noted that for “reasons of public policy, courts should be cautious to sustain contracts to make mutual wills, because such contracts, in effect destroy the revocability of wills, and fail to allow for changes in circumstances as years pass.” New Mexico’s adoption of Section 45-2-701 effectively creates a mini-statute of frauds for contracts to make wills and adds a writing requirement to the common-law rule that a contract to make a will must be clearly established and be certain and unambiguous in its terms. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.