Wyrsch v. Milke
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SUTIN, Judge.
Defendants Milke and Blair (M & B) appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, Wyrsch, and from a judgment in favor of cross-claimant, Adams. We affirm.
The trial court made extensive findings of fact, none of which are challenged by M & B. Therefore, these findings are binding on this Court on appeal. State ex rel. Newsome v. Alarid, 90 N.M. 790, 568 P.2d 1236 (1977). In fact, M & B in their brief do not attack any of the findings of the court.
A. Wyrsch v. M & B is affirmed.
The pertinent findings are summarized as follows:
On July 3, 1974, Milke entered into a written…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Newsome v. AlaridNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
- Santa Clara-San Benito Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors' Ass'n v. Local Union No. 332California Court of Appeal · 1974
- Coe v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Watts v. HoganArizona Supreme Court · 1975
- Lockerby v. AmonWashington Supreme Court · 1911
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Ledbetter v. WebbNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- DeWitt v. BalbenWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
- Boss Barbara, Inc. v. NewbillNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
- Elephant Butte Resort Marina, Inc. v. WooldridgeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- Western Commerce Bank v. GillespieNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.