Legal Opinion
Roth v. Thompson
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided January 23, 1992No. 19708PublishedCited by 175 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRANCHINI, Justice.
In this appeal we consider the statutory proviso that contractors comply with licensing requirements as a prerequisite to utilizing the courts to file or foreclose mechanic’s liens. Plaintiff Roth was the qualifying party for a GS-30 license held by Rocky Mountain Plastering until January 1982, at which time he was deleted as the qualifying party and the license expired. A GS-30 license holder may perform plastering, stuccoing, and lathing services.
In November 1987, defendants Peach and Thompson (Thompson Defendants) entered into a contract with LaFortune for…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Goodman v. Brock Ex Rel. Estate of BrockNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1972
- Koenig v. PerezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1986
- Latipac, Inc. v. Superior Court of Marin CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. AnayaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- Mascarenas v. JaramilloNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by175 opinions
- Self v. United Parcel Service, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
- Headley v. Morgan Management Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
- State v. RowellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
- Ocana v. American Furniture Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
- Romero v. Philip Morris Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
170 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.