Legal Opinion
Medina v. Foundation Reserve Insurance
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided April 30, 1997No. 23147PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BACA, Justice.
1.Foundation Reserve appeals the denial of its motion to vacate an arbitration award. The district court found that the award was obtained by fraud, corruption, and undue means, and therefore should be vacated under the New Mexico Uniform Arbitration Act. See NMSA 1978, § 44-7-12(A)(l). However, the district court concluded that it had no authority to order relief because, under Rule 1-060(B)(6) NMRA 1997, of the rules of civil procedure, the motion to vacate the arbitration award was not timely. We vacate the district court order affirming the award and remand the case…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Roni K. Dogherra v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Bd. of Educ. of Carlsbad v. HarrellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- Dairyland Insurance v. RoseNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- Medina v. Foundation Reserve InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- United Technology & Resources, Inc. v. Dar Al IslamNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Durham v. GuestNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- Durham v. GuestNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- Waverlee Homes, Inc. v. McMichaelSupreme Court of Alabama · 2003
- Low v. MINICHINOHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2011
- Eagle Laundry v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.