Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Montaño v. Frezza
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided June 19, 2015No. 35,297; No. 35,214; Docket No. 32,403Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSutin, Judge
{45} I concur in the majority’s resolution of the comity question. I respectfully dissent in regard to the majority’s approbation given to the district court’s application of the place-of-the-wrong rule.
A. INTRODUCTION: Dr. Frezza’s Points on Appeal
{46} Dr. Frezza’s points on appeal, aside from the writ of error issue, are that (1) the place-of-the-wrong rule and public policy concerns require that Texas law apply to Ms. Montaño’s claims, and (2) the doctrine of comity requires the application of Texas law. The Texas law to which Dr. Frezza refers is the TTCA.
1. The Place-of-the-Wrong Point
{47…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Nevada v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. HyattSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Terrazas v. Garland & Loman, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
- Sam v. Estate of SamNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
- National Bank of Arizona v. MooreNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.