Legal Opinion

Perez v. Gil's Estate

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 1924No. 2753PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OE THE COURT.

BRATTON, J.

1. Findings of fact made by the trial court that the supplies furnished were necessary expenses, and that all of the money, save the $1,000 which was paid directly to the appellant and by him credited upon his indebtedness, was used to pay off and discharge the operating' expenses of the business, are supported by substantial evidence. They will, therefore, not be disturbed on appeal. We shall consume neither time nor space to cite tbe many decisions from this court declaring this well-known rule.

2. Much bas been said by counsel in their briefs with respect to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Woods v. RidleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1854
  2. Williamson's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
  3. Donnelly's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
  4. Thomas v. Provident Life & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1905
  5. Nathan v. Lehman, Abraham & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1882

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. HumphrysCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1938
  2. In Re Will of SkardaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Securities Inv. Co. of St. Louis v. DonnelleyNevada Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Shortle v. McCloskeyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1935
  5. JR Simplot Co. v. JelinekNebraska Supreme Court · 2008

4 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