6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 18 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Sandoval v. Valdez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sandoval v. Valdez Anchor | green | “would result in a violation of fundamental principles of justice of new mexico.” | 3 |
| 2 | Estep v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance | green | “reiterated the abandonment of the common law rule of interspousal immunity” | 3 |
| 3 | State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Ballard Ex Rel. Ballard | green | “a question of contract interpretation, not one of fundamental interests,” | 3 |
| 4 | State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Ballard Ex Rel. Ballard | green | “whether limiting or completely excluding benefits based on familial status, violate public policy and fundamental principles of justice.” | 3 |
| 5 | Demir v. FARMERS TEXAS COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY | green | “whether limiting or completely excluding benefits based on familial status, violate public policy and fundamental principles of justice.” | 3 |
| 6 | Miera v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance | green | “the question of whether application of the law to undisputed facts supports summary judgment in a case seeking to benefit from uninsured motorist coverage is a question we review de novo.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.