McDonald v. Senn
New Mexico Supreme Court
1Dissent
Much of the somewhat lengthy opinion written by the Chief Justice for the majority to support soundness of the result reached represents an attempt to distinguish four California decisions, namely, Smedberg v. Bevilockway, 7 Cal.App.2d 578,46 P.2d 820; Grace v. Carpenter, 42 Cal.App.2d 301, 108 P.2d 701; McClain v. Tufts, 83 Cal.App.2d 140, 187 P.2d 818, and Grolemund v. Cafferata, 17 Cal.2d 679, 111 P.2d 641. In my opinion, the effort to distinguish these cases fails, each of them affording decisive authority for a result directly opposite that declared by the majority. The prevailing…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- United States v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. MalcolmSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Pearsall v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Beals ex rel. Walker v. AresNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1919
- Grolemund v. CafferataCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.