Legal Opinion

Tenorio v. Nolen

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided August 1, 1969No. 297PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HENDLEY, Judge.

Defendant relies on two points for reversal (1) his motion for continuance should have been sustained, and (2) an instruction on warning by a motorist to a pedestrian was misleading. The claims are not well taken.

During depositions Frankie Barela was named as a possible witness. There were two Frankie Barelas. Defendant’s counsel talked to one of them and obtained a statement concerning the accident in question. Plaintff’s counsel talked to the other, who knew nothing about the accident. Subsequently, upon inquiry, plaintiff’s counsel advised defendant’s counsel that he…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Jackson v. Southwestern Public Service CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Hayes ex rel. Evans v. HagemeierNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Hall v. DelvatArizona Supreme Court · 1964
  4. State v. NietoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Giles v. TysonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. McCrary v. Bill McCarty Const. Co., Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Camp v. Bernalillo County Medical CenterNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Schmider v. SapirNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Crockett v. Encino Gardens Care Center, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1971
  5. Gonzales v. GonzalesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1973

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API