Stansell v. New Mexico Lottery
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WECHSLER, Judge.
{1} Plaintiffs Randy Stansell, Kenneth Nutt, and Chris Canning appeal the district court order dismissing their Unfair Practices Act claims, and the New Mexico Lottery (the Lottery) appeals the district court order denying its motion for attorney fees. We conclude that the Lottery is not a “person” under the Unfair Practices Act (UPA), NMSA 1978, §§ 57-12-1 to -26 (1967, as amended through 2007). We further conclude that Plaintiffs’ complaint was not groundless or frivolous. We affirm on both appeals.
BACKGROUND
{2} The Lottery is a governmental instrumentality…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Key v. Chrysler Motors Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
- New Mexico Right to Choose/NARAL v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1999
- Janis v. California State Lottery CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Saylor v. VallesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2002
- De Vargas Savings & Loan Ass'n v. CampbellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Anna Maria Curcio v. State of Florida Department etc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
- Aquifer Science v. VerhinesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2022
- Cedrins v. SF Community CollegeNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2010
- City of Albuquerque v. The Segal Company (Western States), Inc.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2021
- Kiewit NM v. DayNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.