Legal Opinion
Lovato v. City of Albuquerque
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided September 10, 1987No. 16495PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RANSOM, Justice.
The City of Albuquerque and named city officials (City) challenge the permanent writ of mandamus by which the district court ordered the City to conduct a personnel board hearing requested by petitioner Lovato. We affirm.
Lovato has been a classified city employee, in various capacities, for twenty-seven years. A classified employee is one who is permanently employed by the City and entitled to all rights and benefits guaranteed by the merit system, one of which is recourse to the grievance procedure. Since 1973 Lovato has been on assignment status, a position that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Russillo v. ScarboroughCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- County of Santa Fe v. Public Service Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Rainaldi v. Public Employees Retirement BoardNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
- Richardson v. City of AlbuquerqueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- Brantley Farms v. Carlsbad Irrigation DistrictNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.