Legal Opinion
Tull v. City of Albuquerque
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided September 21, 1995No. 16193PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BLACK, Judge.
Plaintiffs sued the City alleging breach of an employment contract. The district court dismissed the claim, determining that the statute of limitations on Plaintiffs’ claim had run and that Plaintiffs’ complaint therefore did not state a viable cause of action. Plaintiffs appeal that dismissal. We affirm.
FACTS
This case was decided pursuant to a motion to dismiss under SCRA 1986, 1-012(B)(6) (Repl.1992). We therefore accept the facts in Plaintiffs’ complaint as true. See California First Bank v. State, 111 N.M. 64, 66, 801 P.2d 646, 648 (1990). The following are the facts…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- California First Bank v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1990
- Miller v. Beneficial Management Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- Prouty v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1983
- Arthur Taylor v. General Motors Corporation and Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Park Nicollet Clinic v. HamannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- Anderson Living Trust v. WPX Energy Production, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2014
- Maher v. Tietex Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
- Village of Angel Fire v. Board of County CommissionersNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2010
- Village of Angel Fire v. COLFAX CO. BCCNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.