TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Citing references

Opinions citing Chavez v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 2001 NMCA 065, 31 P.3d 1027

32 citing cases

Negative treatment
Depth Newest Oldest Most cited
Majority opinions only
1 2–3 4–9 10+ times cited
  1. Valdez v. Estrada
    New Mexico Court of AppealsSeptember 4, 2018 Unpublished

    Comm’rs of Curry Cty., 2001- 6 NMCA-065, ¶ 10, 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 , is intended to protect “all but the 7 plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law[,]” and is withheld 8 only in exceptional cases. Cockrell v.

  2. Romero v. Mooney
    New Mexico Court of AppealsSeptember 18, 2019 Unpublished

    Chavez v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs of Curry Cty., 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 14 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

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

    Comm’rs of Curry Cty., 2001- NMCA-065, ¶ 16, 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see id. ¶ 20 (stating that “the absence of a case directly on point does not mean that a public official is automatically entitled to

  4. Martinez v. New Mexico Department of Transportation
    2011 NMCA 82, 258 P.3d 483 New Mexico Court of AppealsJune 1, 2011

    Chavez v. BA. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 35 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 . Moreover, “remedies for the violation of discovery rules or orders are discretionary with the trial court.” Id. Plaintiffs assert that DOT’s late disclosure of Dr.

  5. Martinez v. NEW MEXICO DEPT. OF TRANSP.
    258 P.3d 483 New Mexico Court of AppealsAugust 5, 2011

    Chavez v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 35 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 . Moreover, "remedies for the violation of discovery rules or orders are discretionary with the trial court." Id. Plaintiffs assert that DOT's late disclosure of Dr.

  6. State v. Chavez
    New Mexico Court of AppealsOctober 30, 2012 Unpublished

    Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 17 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 2 1 (recognizing that law enforcement officers may not make a warrantless entry into a 2 residence unless, “exigent circumstances have been shown indicating that immediate 3 action is necessary

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

    Hill, 110 F.3d 733, 738-40 (10th Cir.1997); see also e.g., Chavez v. Board of County Comm’rs of Curry County, 130 N.M. 753, 761-62 , 31 P.3d 1027, 1035-36 (2001) (discussing and applying federal law); Yount v.

  8. State v. Ryon
    2005 NMSC 005, 108 P.3d 1032 New Mexico Supreme CourtMarch 3, 2005

    West Virginia, 528 U.S. 11, 13 , 120 S.Ct. 7 , 145 L.Ed.2d 16 (1999) (per curiam); accord Mincey, 437 U.S. at 390 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 ; Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 21 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 .

  9. Lujan v. City of Albuquerque
    2003 NMCA 104, 75 P.3d 423 New Mexico Court of AppealsJune 19, 2003

    Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 44 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (concluding there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of a motion to dismiss the complaint when the plaintiff failed to disclose his theories of liability prior to trial

  10. State v. AUGUSTIN M.
    2003 NMCA 065, 68 P.3d 182 New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 21, 2003

    See Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 11 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 ; Doe v. Leach, 1999-NMCA-117, ¶ 12 , 128 N.M. 28 , 988 P.2d 1252 ; Sugg v. Albuquerque Pub. Sch. Dist., 1999-NMCA-111, ¶ 8 , 128 N.M. 1 , 988 P.2d 311 ; Cockrell v.

  11. King v. Allstate Insurance
    2004 NMCA 031, 86 P.3d 631 New Mexico Court of AppealsJanuary 30, 2004

    Carrillo, 114 N.M. at 614-16 , 845 P.2d at 137-39 ; Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 10 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 ; Sugg v. Albuquerque Pub. Sch. Dist., 1999-NMCA-111, ¶ 8 , 128 N.M. 1 , 988 P.2d 311 ; Cockrell v.

  12. Williams v. Rio Rancho Public Schools
    2008 NMCA 150, 195 P.3d 879 New Mexico Court of AppealsSeptember 11, 2008

    See Carrillo, 114 N.M. at 614-16 , 845 P.2d at 137-39 ; Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 10 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 ; Sugg v. Albuquerque Pub. Sch. Disk, 1999-NMCA-111, ¶ 8 , 128 N.M. 1 , 988 P.2d 311 .

  13. State v. Gutierrez
    2008 NMCA 018, 176 P.3d 1154 New Mexico Court of AppealsNovember 26, 2007

    Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 17 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also State v.

  14. State v. Gutierrez
    176 P.3d 1154 New Mexico Court of AppealsJanuary 22, 2008

    Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 17 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also State v.

  15. Allen v. Tong
    2003 NMCA 056, 66 P.3d 963 New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 1, 2003

    See Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 40 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 ; Gracia, 120 N.M. at 197 , 900 P.2d at 357 . Counsel’s Closing Argument {35} The case below was tried on a bifurcated basis — first liability, then damages.

  16. State v. Benavidez
    2010 NMCA 035, 231 P.3d 1132 New Mexico Court of AppealsJanuary 29, 2010

    Chavez v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 21 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (“[T]he Fourth Amendment ... was intended to protect the sanctity of an individual’s home and privacy.”).

  17. Gallegos v. Vernier
    458 P.3d 533 New Mexico Court of AppealsNovember 19, 2018

    Chavez v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs of Curry Cty., 7 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 30 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (concluding that the 8 defendant officers were “not entitled to qualified immunity” where “the relevant 9 law was clearly established”).

  18. State v. Ayala
    New Mexico Court of AppealsNovember 7, 2011 Unpublished

    Bd. of County Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 26 , 130 N.M. 753 , 14 31 P.3d 1027 . 15 Based upon Detective Flores’ testimony and the facts known at the time of entry 16 into Mother’s Apartment, the State has failed to meet the first part of the Mitchell

  19. State v. Jones
    New Mexico Court of AppealsApril 8, 2015 Unpublished

    Comm'rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 17 , 10 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (observing that law enforcement officers may not make 11 a warrantless entry into a residence unless “exigent circumstances have been shown 12 indicating that immediate action is necessary

  20. Fred Loya Ins. Co. v. Swiech
    413 P.3d 530 New Mexico Court of AppealsDecember 4, 2017

    Comm'rs , 2001-NMCA-065 , ¶ 12, 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 , we have reviewed such orders after final judgment where the summary judgment motion presents an issue of law, Chaara v.

  21. Washington v. Board of Regents of NMSU
    New Mexico Court of AppealsMarch 29, 2022 Unpublished

    Chavez v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Curry Cnty., 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 44 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 .

  22. Dombos v. Stewart
    New Mexico Court of AppealsJuly 19, 2021 Unpublished

    Chavez v. Bd. Of Cnty. Comm’rs, 2001-NMCA-065, ¶ 12 , 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

  23. In the Interest of J.F.C.
    96 S.W.3d 256 Texas Supreme CourtDecember 31, 2002 Dissent

    Board of County Comm’rs., 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027, 1039 (Ct.App.2001) (fundamental error applies, for example, when there is no jurisdiction or issue is a matter of public interest affecting large number of people); Elezaj v. P.J. Carlin Constr.

  24. Walsh v. Erie County Department of Job & Family Services
    240 F. Supp. 2d 731 N.D. OhioJanuary 22, 2003

    .); Chavez v. Board of County Comm’rs of Curry County, 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027, 1035 (N.M.App.2001).

  25. In re JFC
    96 S.W.3d 256 Texas Supreme CourtDecember 31, 2002

    Board of County Comm'rs., 130 N.M. 753 , 31 P.3d 1027, 1039 (Ct.App.2001) (fundamental error applies, for example, when there is no jurisdiction or issue is a matter of public interest affecting large number of people); Elezaj v. P.J. Carlin Constr.

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