 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Street v. Alpha Constr. Servs., Docket No. 25,540,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 22, 2006
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plain language of the Workers' Compensation Act (Act), N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 52-1-1 to -70, did not provide for immunity between special employees and direct employers of other special employees; roofing company and employee were not co-employees and company was not entitled to protection from suit by employee under Act's exclusivity provisions.
|
|||||
| Hydro Res. Corp. v. Gray, Docket No. 24,012,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted to a purported owner of water rights whose predecessor-in-interest was a lessor because a former lessee acted on behalf of the former lessor when it developed water rights for use in mining operations; the doctrine of prior appropriation under N.M. Const. art. XVI, § 2 did not apply to the case.
|
|||||
| Monks Own Ltd. v. Monastery of Christ in the Desert, NO. 25,787,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under the New Mexico Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 39-4B-1 to -9, a buyer's failure to raise a personal jurisdiction defense due to a failure to appear in a proceeding in Canada did not constitute a waiver of the issue where it was raised in a later proceeding seeking to domesticate the judgment.
|
|||||
| Palmer v. Palmer, NO. 24,869,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court reserved jurisdiction to distribute couple's retirement benefits when the former husband, the employee spouse, actually received them and neither N.M. Stat. Ann. § 39-1-1 and N.M. R. Ann. 1-060(B) precluded the court from considering the former wife's motion to enforce the marital settlement agreement and to grant relief to the wife.
|
|||||
| Demir v. Farmers Tex. County Mut. Ins. Co., Docket No. 26,040,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though an insured was a resident of Texas and an insurer was a Texas company, the public policy of New Mexico precluded the application of Tex. Ins. Code Ann. art. 5.06-1(2)(d) regarding the requirement of contact between a covered vehicle and an unknown vehicle for uninsured motorist coverage for an accident in New Mexico.
|
|||||
| Grine v. Peabody Natural Res., Docket No. 29,196,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, June 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As employer had not selected health care provider (HCP) in compliance with N.M. Stat. Ann. § 52-1-49 and physician it selected was not treating HCP nor authorized to provide IME, his testimony was inadmissible and worker met burden to show causal connection between heart attack and his work-related stress as medical probability by expert testimony.
|
|||||
| Manzanares v. Allstate Ins. Co., Docket No. 25,451,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer because while the insured was generally able to recover punitive damages under her UIM coverage, the insurer was entitled to offset the amounts the insured received from the tortfeasors against her UIM coverage.
|
|||||
| State v. Moya, Docket No. 25,546,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, June 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the grant of defendant's motion to preclude the use of the prior conviction to enhance his sentence because defendant's prior conviction was a misdemeanor in Utah and N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-18-17(D) permitted sentence enhancement only for convictions that were felonies in the state in which they were committed.
|
|||||
| State v. Stephen F., Docket No. 29,128,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, June 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: N.M. R. Ann. 10-229(C) of the Children's Court Rules was the proper time limit to be applied to a child, adjudicated as a youthful offender, who was committed for diagnosis prior to disposition. Since the children's court failed to recommence the dispositional proceeding within the 45-day time limit, the appropriate remedy was release from custody.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
