Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yedidag v. Roswell Clinic Corp.

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided September 27, 2013No. 34,286; Docket No. 31,653Published

1DissentSutin, Judge

{42} I respectfully dissent. Dr. Yedidag’s private right of action and implied promise claims should have been dismissed.

{43} Paragraph 2 of the employment agreement entitled “Establishment of Professional Relationship” required Dr. Yedidag to “render professional medical services and such reasonable administrative and management services as may be delegated to [him] ... in accordance with all of the terms and conditions of [the agreement.” Dr. Yedidag was also required to “devote full time and attention, with [his] best endeavors and skill for the interest, benefit[,] and best advantage of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Continental Potash, Inc. v. Freeport-McMoran, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Garcia v. Middle Rio Grande Conservancy DistrictNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Sanders v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Davis v. Devon Energy Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Winrock Inn Co. v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1996

5 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