Witcher v. Capitan Drilling Company
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceSutin, Judge
(specially concurring)
I specially concur in the majority opinion. I desire to point out two matters.
A. UN CHALLEN GED FINDINGS
In affirming this workmen’s compensation case, we hold that unchallenged findings are the facts before us. This is established law. For purposes of reversing, the majority opinion in Ortiz v. Ortiz & Torres Dri-Wall Company, 83 N.M. 452, 493 P.2d 418 (Ct.App.1972), held that failure to specifically challenge findings of fact was only a technical error and could be avoided. I dissented. Ortiz, supra, should not be considered valid authority on this point since a writ of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ortiz v. Ortiz & Torres Dri-Wall CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
- Mathews v. New Mexico Light & Power Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1942
- Gonzales v. Pecos Valley Packing Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
- Montoya v. SanchezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1968
- Travelers Insurance Co. v. SeaboltCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1961