Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Breen v. State Taxation & Revenue Department

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided August 28, 2012No. 30,066 30,048Published

1ConcurrenceSutin, Judge

(specially concurring).

{37} One difficulty in deciding the issues in this case is that the case was not particularly well tried, is not particularly well presented on appeal, and is convoluted. But decide the issues we must.

Schneider’s Status

{38} I am not sold on the majority opinion’s need to emphasize that Schneider was not a party. Indications are that she was not a party when she filed a motion to quash the subpoenas under Rule 1-045(C)(3) NMRA, although, in essence, it would seem that she became a party to the action in a limited manner, namely, to obtain an order quashing the subpoenas.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. University of Pennsylvania v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Memorial Hospital for McHenry County v. The Honorable Milton I. Shadur, United States District JudgeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
  4. Webb v. Standard Oil Co. of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Albuquerque Rape Crisis Center v. BlackmerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005

2 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