City of Hobbs v. Chesport, Ltd.
New Mexico Supreme Court
1DissentMoise, Justice
I feel compelled to express my disagreement with the disposition by the majority of appellant’s points II and III for the asserted reason of failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 12(1) (§ 21-2-1(12) (1), N.M.S.A.1953) which requires that when less than a complete record is called for in the praecipe “a concise statement of the points” on which appellant intends to rely is required, “[t]he review shall be limited to the points as stated.” and that the two points in question are not set forth.
My disagreement arises because the matters omitted in the praecipe had no possible effect on this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chronister Ex Rel. Chronister v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1960
- State v. ApodacaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1938
- State v. GonzalesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1939
- Robinson v. BlackNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963