Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Eldin v. Farmers Alliance Mutual Insurance

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1994No. 15638Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHartz, Judge

I concur in Judge Pickard’s opinion through Section B of the Discussion. I also concur in reversing the judgment and remanding for further proceedings. I cannot join, however, in the analysis in Section C of the opinion. I believe that the majority opinion reads too much into Roberts Oil Co. v. Transamerica Insurance Co., 113 N.M. 745, 833 P.2d 222 (1992). In particular, I believe that the law bars recovery by the insured under a theft insurance policy if (1) the policy voids coverage when the insured violates the obligation to respond under oath to questions by the insurer, (2) the insured…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, Plaintiff-Counter v. A. Buford Wigginton, D/B/A Pickens Pharmacy, Defendant-CounterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  3. Allan R. Pervis, Jr. v. State Farm Fire and Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
  4. Wayne v. Farm Family Mutual InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
  5. Colleen Wood v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994

15 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