Legal Opinion

Wyrsch v. Milke

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided September 28, 1978No. 3022PublishedCited by 15 opinions

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

  1. State Ex Rel. Newsome v. AlaridNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Santa Clara-San Benito Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors' Ass'n v. Local Union No. 332California Court of Appeal · 1974
  3. Coe v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Watts v. HoganArizona Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Lockerby v. AmonWashington Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Ledbetter v. WebbNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
  2. DeWitt v. BalbenWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Boss Barbara, Inc. v. NewbillNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Elephant Butte Resort Marina, Inc. v. WooldridgeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Western Commerce Bank v. GillespieNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1989

10 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