Legal Opinion
STATE, EX REL. STATE HIGHWAY DEPT. ETC. v. Shaw
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1977No. 11143PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAYNE, Justice.
In 1962 it became a matter of general knowledge that a by-pass, which would be a part of Interstate Highway 40, would be built in the Tucumcari, New Mexico area. Based upon this information, Texaco and Exxon, in separate transactions, acquired “floating options” to purchase tracts of property in the vicinity of the highway. The floating options gave the defendants the right to select a specific location within a general tract of land at such time as the exact location of the highway and its right-of-way became fixed by the State Highway Department. By 1969 the Highway…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Merced Irrigation District v. WoolstenhulmeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- United States v. 172.80 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situate in Mercer County, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Cecelia E. StambaughCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965
- United States v. 2,353.28 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situate in the Counties of Brevard and Volusia, State of Florida, and Lucille M. BairCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. YurcicNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1973
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Stuckey's Stores, Inc. v. O'CheskeyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- Lopez v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
- Gonzales v. Public Employees Retirement BoardNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1992
- National Advertising Co v. State Ex Rel. New Mexico State Highway CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
- Tiberi v. Cigna CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.