State Human Rights Commission v. Accurate MacHine & Tool Co.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBLES, Judge.
{1} Accurate Machine & Tool Co., Inc. (Accurate) appeals the district court’s order enforcing a judgment from the Human Rights Commission (HRC), awarding Sandra Bankston (Claimant) $63,657.05 for discrimination claims based on sexual harassment and retaliation. Accurate argues that the HRC lacked subject matter jurisdiction when it entered its judgment, and it was therefore improper for the district court to enforce the HRC’s determination. Accurate also argues that the HRC conducted a “one[-]sided” and “cursory” investigation. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
{2} Claimant filed…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Matter of Adoption of DoeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1984
- Redman v. BD. OF REGENTS OF NEW MEXICONew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1984
- Cordova v. LarsenNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2004
- New Mexico Department of Health v. ComptonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2000
- In Re Adjustments to Franchise FeesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Madrid v. Village of ChamaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
- Madrid v. Village of ChamaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
- State v. MarkerNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016