Legal Opinion · Dissent

Constantineau v. First National Bank

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided April 16, 1991No. 11730Published

1DissentChavez, Judge

I respectfully dissent. The logical extension of the majority’s reasoning will lead to results not in accord with Dupper v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 105 N.M. 503, 734 P.2d 743 (1987) when applied to many fact situations. Take, for instance, an employee walking from her assigned parking spot to an employer’s premises. After she walks into the Galería, her co-worker, who parked right next to the employee but in an unassigned spot where the employer’s various workers park every day, catches up with the first employee and walks alongside her. They both trip on the same protruding floor board, and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Livingstone v. Abraham & Straus, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  2. Dupper v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Claim of Brooks v. New York Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. Livingstone v. Abraham & Straus, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987
  5. Sloss v. Case Western Reserve UniversityOhio Court of Appeals · 1985

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