 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Day, Docket No. 25,290,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was insufficient evidence to prove that defendant drove with a breath alcohol content (BAC) of .08 in violation of N.M. Stat. Ann. § 66-8-102(C)(1) where the BAC reading of .08 occurred 66 minutes after defendant's arrest and the State failed to present scientific analysis concerning absorption, peaking, and elimination.
|
|||||
| Phelps Dodge Tyrone, Inc. v. N.M. Water Quality Control Comm'n, Docket No. 25,027,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: New Mexico Environment Department could impose reasonable permit conditions, but method used by New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission to determine whether standards were reasonable was flawed, and Commission had to address issues raised by N.M. Stat. Ann. § 74-6-5(E)(3). No due process violations existed because of Commission's composition.
|
|||||
| State v. Duran, Docket No. 28,685,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, July 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for first degree murder under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-2-1(A)(1) was affirmed because there was evidence of deliberate intent based upon the prolonged struggle. Defendant's conviction for tampering with the evidence under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-22-5 was overturned because there was no evidence of an overt act to destroy evidence.
|
|||||
| Monks Own Ltd. v. Monastery of Christ in the Desert, Docket No. 25,787,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to N.M. Stat. Ann. § 39-4B-6(B), sufficient contacts between the New Mexico monastery and Canada supported a finding that the Canadian court had personal jurisdiction over the monastery in a contract dispute with a Canadian corporation; therefore, the district court properly domesticated the Canadian judgment in New Mexico.
|
|||||
| State v. Hunter, Docket No. 29,258,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, July 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's no contest plea to three counts of custodial interference, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-4-4, was not knowingly and voluntarily made because he received ineffective advice from counsel; defendant would not have done so without this advice, and the district court abused its discretion by refusing to allow defendant to withdraw his plea.
|
|||||
| Terrazas v. Garland & Loman, Inc., Docket No. 24,581,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Foundation of employees' negligence lawsuit was in New Mexico tort law, not Texas workers' compensation law; for choice-of-law purposes, contractor's right to assert comparative fault as a defense to common-law negligence action was issue of tort law. Substantive tort law of New Mexico governed contractor's right to assert comparative negligence.
|
|||||
| K.R. Swerdfeger Constr., Inc. v. Bd. of Regents, Docket No. 25,085,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Construction company contested arbitration award for university when construction company experienced delays after university failed to locate underground utilities pursuant to One-Call Statute, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 62-14-1 to -10. Award was not vacated for public policy reasons because statute did not prohibit contractual delegation of duties.
|
|||||
| Palmer v. Palmer, Docket No. 24,869,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, July 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court had jurisdiction to enforce a final divorce decree and divide survivor benefits between wife and former husband; under "reserved jurisdiction" or "pay as it comes in" method, settlement agreement divided community assets, including retirement benefits, and court reserved jurisdiction to distribute benefits when husband actually received them.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
