Legal Opinion

Kipnis v. Jusbasche

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided June 19, 2015No. 35,249; Docket No. 33,821PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BUSTAMANTE, Judge.

{1} Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendants for fraud, constructive fraud, and conversion based on Defendants’ failure to tell them that Defendant Jusbasche had pled nolo contendere to a charge of theft of trade secrets nineteen years earlier. The district court dismissed the complaint on the ground that Rule 11-410(A)(2) NMRA prohibited admission of evidence of the plea and related judgment. We hold that the rule does not prohibit admission of the plea of nolo contendere and related judgment when they are not offered as proof of guilt. Consequently, we reverse that…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. Alvarez-LopezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Azar v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Olsen v. CorreiroCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999
  4. R.A. Peck, Inc. v. Liberty Federal Savings BankNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Town of Groton v. United Steelworkers of AmericaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kipnis v. JusbascheNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
  2. State v. LozaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. Kipnis v. JusbascheNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API