Legal Opinion

Meiboom v. Watson

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1998No. 18021PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

APODACA, Judge.

{1} Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for relief from judgment under Rule 1-060(B)(6) NMRA 1998. The district court previously dismissed their complaint. Plaintiffs moved for reinstatement, and their counsel approved a stipulated order of dismissal. Plaintiffs argue two points on appeal: (1) the district court had jurisdiction to review the ease for reinstatement, and (2) the failures of Plaintiffs’ attorney justify reinstatement of the case. We hold that the district court erred in determining it did not have jurisdiction to consider…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. King v. LujanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Gathman-Matotan Architects & Planners, Inc. v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Resolution Trust Corp. v. FerriNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Baca v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. Eldin v. Farmers Alliance Mutual InsuranceNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1994

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Meiboom v. WatsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2000
  2. H-B-S Partnership v. Aircoa Hospitality Services, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API