Legal Opinion

Shumate v. Hillis

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided June 2, 1969No. 8632PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOISE, Justice.

Plaintiffs-appellants instituted this action to recover against defendant-appellee on a judgment rendered in California. A properly exemplified copy of the California judgment reciting that defendant had “been duly and regularly served with process pursuant to the provisions of the law pertaining to same” was attached to the complaint.

Defendant filed an answer (1) asserting that the complaint failed to state a cause of action; (2) pleading that the claim asserted was barred by the statute of limitations; (3) denying all of the allegations of the complaint; and (4)…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Southern Union Gas Co. v. Briner Rust Proofing Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Federal Building Service v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Worley v. United States Borax and Chemical Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  4. General Services Corp. v. Board of CommissionersNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Houston Fire and Casualty Insurance Co. v. FallsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1960

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Pharmaseal Laboratories, Inc. v. GoffeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
  2. First National Bank Ex Rel. Huckleby v. Nor-Am Agricultural Products, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Oschwald v. ChristieNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Spears v. Canon De Carnue Land GrantNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Wilson v. Albuquerque Board of RealtorsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1970

6 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