Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Anaya v. Scarborough
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided January 17, 1966No. 7980PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOISE, Justice.
Petitioner claims respondent Judge has an “interest” in the proceeding so as to disqualify him from sitting in this cause under the provisions of Art. VI, § 18, N.M. Const, which reads :
“No judge of any court nor justice of the peace shall, except by consent of all parties, sit in the trial of any cause in which either of the parties shall be related to him by affinity or consanguinity within the degree of first cousin, or in which he was counsel, or in the trial of which he presided in any inferior court, or in which he has an interest.”
In State ex rel. Hannah v. Armijo, 38…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- La Buy v. Howes Leather Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Public Utilities Commission v. PollakSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- State v. RoyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1936
- State ex rel. Barnard v. Board of EducationWashington Supreme Court · 1898
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Russillo v. ScarboroughCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- United Nuclear Corp. v. General Atomic Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1980
- Reichert v. STATE EX REL. McCULLOCHMontana Supreme Court · 2012
- Carrillo v. RostroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
- Gerety v. DemersNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1978
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.