TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Citing references

Opinions citing Yount v. Millington, 869 P.2d 283 (N.M. Ct. App. 1993)

21 citing cases

Negative treatment
Depth Newest Oldest Most cited
Majority opinions only
1 2–3 4–9 10+ times cited
  1. Dunn v. McFeeley
    1999 NMCA 084, 984 P.2d 760 New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 28, 1999

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 98 , 869 P.2d 283, 286 (Ct.App.1993).

  2. E. Navajo Dine v. Environ. Dep't
    New Mexico Court of AppealsJanuary 14, 2013 Unpublished

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 103 , 869 P.2d 15 283, 291 (Ct.

  3. NEW ENERGY ECONOMY, INC. v. Shoobridge
    2010 NMSC 049, 243 P.3d 746 New Mexico Supreme CourtNovember 10, 2010

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 103 , 869 P.2d 283, 291 (Ct.App.1993). One of the “prerequisites of ‘actual controversy’ warranting consideration in a declaratory judgment action [is that] ... the issue involved must be ripe for judicial determination.”

  4. Starko, Inc. v. Gallegos
    2006 NMCA 085, 140 P.3d 1085 New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 26, 2006

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 102 , 869 P.2d 283, 290 (Ct.App.1993). Qualified immunity is “the usual rule,” and it is only in exceptional cases that governmental actors will have no immunity from claims against them in an individual capacity.

  5. Silva v. Town of Springer
    912 P.2d 304 New Mexico Court of AppealsJanuary 29, 1996

    The test for determining the applicability of qualified immunity was recently discussed by this Court in Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 98 , 869 P.2d 283, 286 (Ct.App.1993), cert. denied, 117 N.M. 121 , 869 P.2d 820 (1994).

  6. Johnson v. Lally
    887 P.2d 1262 New Mexico Court of AppealsOctober 12, 1994

    Millington, 117 N.M. 95 , 869 P.2d 283 (Ct.App.1993), cert. denied, 117 N.M. 121 , 869 P.2d 820 (1994), that declaratory relief, even for past constitutional violations, was not appropriate absent the likelihood of continuing, unconstitutional activity.

  7. Wagner v. AGW CONSULTANTS
    2005 NMSC 016, 114 P.3d 1050 New Mexico Supreme CourtJune 29, 2005

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 100 , 869 P.2d 283, 288 (Ct.App.1993).

  8. In re Esther
    248 P.3d 863 New Mexico Supreme CourtJanuary 21, 2011

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App.1993) ("[W]hen a child's safety is threatened, that is a sufficient basis to justify postponing the parent's hearing until after the child has been taken into protective custody.").

  9. State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Department v. Marlene C.
    2011 NMSC 5 New Mexico Supreme CourtJanuary 21, 2011

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App.1993) (“[W]hen a child’s safety is threatened, that is a sufficient basis to justify postponing the parent’s hearing until after the child has been taken into protective custody.”).

  10. Chavez v. Board of County Commissioners
    2001 NMCA 065, 31 P.3d 1027 New Mexico Court of AppealsJuly 23, 2001

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App. 1993). We also consider whether “the clearly established weight of authority from other courts” supports the law as the plaintiff maintains. Medina v.

  11. Ortiz ex rel. Ortiz v. Shaw
    2008 NMCA 136, 193 P.3d 605 New Mexico Court of AppealsAugust 21, 2008

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 100 , 869 P.2d 283, 288 (Ct.App.1993).

  12. Archuleta v. LaCuesta
    1999 NMCA 113, 988 P.2d 883 New Mexico Court of AppealsJuly 2, 1999

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 98 , 869 P.2d 283, 286 (Ct.App.1993).

  13. Cockrell v. Board of Regents of New Mexico State University
    1999 NMCA 073, 983 P.2d 427 New Mexico Court of AppealsMay 7, 1999

    Apr. 2, 1998) (No. 24,988); Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 98 , 869 P.2d 283, 286 (Ct.App.1993).

  14. State v. Fernandez
    1999 NMCA 128, 990 P.2d 224 New Mexico Court of AppealsAugust 24, 1999

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 98 , 869 P.2d 283, 286 (Ct.App.1993) (explaining that it is “clearly established that the omission of material facts undermines probable cause and violates the Fourth Amendment”).

  15. Kennedy v. Dexter Consolidated Schools
    1998 NMCA 051, 955 P.2d 693 New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 2, 1998

    See Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App.1993); cf. Lanier, 520 U.S. at - - -, 117 S.Ct. at 1226-27 (using similar standard in prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 242 ). We therefore turn to those sources.

  16. Zamora v. City of Belen
    383 F. Supp. 2d 1315 D. New MexicoApril 27, 2005

    Rodriguez, 51 F.3d 1531, 1535 (10th Cir.1995); Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App.1993). Moreover, the law allegedly violated must be a right that the United States Constitution or federal law created. See Gomez v.

  17. CIT Group/Equipment Financing, Inc. v. Horizon Potash Corp.
    884 P.2d 821 New Mexico Court of AppealsAugust 24, 1994

    Atterbury, 113 N.M. 71 , 74 n. 2, 823 P.2d 313 , 316 n. 2 (1992); Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 103 , 869 P.2d 283, 291 (Ct.App.1993), cert. denied, 117 N.M. 121 , 869 P.2d 820 (1994). In State ex rel. W.M. Carroll & Co. v. K.L.

  18. Young v. Gila Reg'l Med. Ctr.
    2021 NMCA 042, 495 P.3d 620 New Mexico Court of AppealsJune 4, 2020

    Yount v. Millington, 1993-NMCA-143 , ¶ 28, 117 N.M. 95 , 869 P.2d 283 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). However, the plaintiff need not show that “the very action in question has previously been held unlawful.” Chavez v. Bd. of Cty.

  19. Sanders v. Montoya
    1999 NMCA 079, 982 P.2d 1064 New Mexico Court of AppealsMay 19, 1999

    Yount v. Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (Ct.App.1993). In any event, by any reasonable construction of the term “clearly established,” Montoya’s actions did not violate clearly established First Amendment rights of Sanders.

  20. Arredondo v. Locklear
    371 F. Supp. 2d 1281 D. New MexicoMay 6, 2005

    Millington, 117 N.M. 95, 101 , 869 P.2d 283, 289 (1993) (same), cert. denied, 117 N.M. 121 , 869 P.2d 820 (1994). 5 .

  21. Carrete v. New Mexico Racing Commission
    D. New MexicoDecember 23, 2021

    Millington, 1993-NMCA-143 , ¶ 34, 117 N.M. 95 , 869 P.2d 283 (rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that declaratory judgment was warranted because there was a danger of injury to others by repetition of the officials’ allegedly wrongful acts)).

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list