 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Rangel v. Save Mart, Inc., Docket No. 24,769,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding attorney's charging lien violated N.M. R. Ann. 1- 011 and awarding sanctions because attorney's assertion of the charging lien was colorable as matter of law; client discharged the attorney and then, about a week later, settled without an attorney for $ 18,000, only $ 3,000 more than the offer obtained by the attorney.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Amanda H., Docket No. 25,623,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that the child was neglected by the mother under N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 32A-4-2(E)(2) and (4); CYFD did not establish that child was without proper parental care or that mother was unable to care for child due to mental illness or other status.
|
|||||
| Ruegsegger v. Bd. of Regents of W. N.M. Univ., Docket No. 30,054,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly dismissed a student's breach of contract claim against a university board of regents where her scholarship agreement did not refer to any duty by the university to comply with university regulations or investigate sexual assault claims and a student handbook did not create a contractual relationship between the parties.
|
|||||
| Schneider Nat'l, Inc. v. Taxation & Revenue Dep't, Docket No. 25,530,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A grant of summary judgment in favor of the Taxation and Revenue Department was appropriate because the corporation did not file within the period required by N.M. Stat. Ann. § 7-1-26(B)(1). Thus, the district court properly dismissed corporation's complaint for a refund of fees for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| State v. Kent, Docket No. 25,483,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction of accessory to attempt to manufacture methamphetamine under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-20(A)(1) where the evidence showed that defendant purchased large quantities of items that were used in manufacturing methamphetamine, knowing that they would be used to manufacture methamphetamine.
|
|||||
| Bankers Trust Co. v. Woodall, Docket No. 25,930,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a divorced husband and wife were cotenants at the time of a property foreclosure and subsequently assigned their rights to appellant and appellees, those parties then became cotenants and appellant's right of redemption inured to the benefit of appellees, triggering their right of contribution.
|
|||||
| State v. Lizzol, Docket No. 25,794,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where officer testified that he had no information or knowledge as to certification of a breath machine other than that he saw a replica of a certification card and only that the machine seemed to work properly, defendant's breath alcohol test results were inadmissible, and the metropolitan court properly dismissed charges against defendant.
|
|||||
| Romero v. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Rio Arriba, Docket No. 24,147 consolidated with Docket No. 24,180,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO, August 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When an owner 's prior use of his property was solely for mining and he applied for permits to mine the entire property, a county commissioners board's decision that the owner had not established an objective intent to expand mining operations to the entire property was irrational and improper under the diminishing assets doctrine.
|
|||||
| State v. Jensen, Docket No. 29,528,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, August 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circumstances satisfied crime of child abuse, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 30-6-3 and 30-6-1(D)(1), where although child's susceptibility to harm was factor jury might consider when determining whether a defendant committed crime, this was insufficient for court to rule that defendant did not cause child to be in a situation that might endanger his health.
|
|||||
| State v. Simmons, Docket No. 29,563,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO, August 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court reversed a judgment sentencing defendant as a habitual offender pursuant to N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-18-17(D) (2003) because the State did not make a prima facie showing that one of defendant's prior felonies met the definition of "prior felony conviction" under § 31-18-17 because the State did not address the timeliness of the conviction.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
