Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Moya v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided September 27, 1965No. 7625Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCompton, Justice

I concur in the results only of the majority opinion as it affirms the main appeal, and disagree with the results reached on the cross-appeal.

With regard to the counterclaim, the court found that by the terms of the application for bond the plaintiff agreed to reimburse the defendant for all losses incurred by it and that the defendant had expended a total of $2,170.21 in plugging the well. Nevertheless, it found that the defendant had failed to mitigate damages in that its contract with Frank Yockey, defendant’s agent, to plug the well was entered into without receiving competitive bids and,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Luvaul v. HolmesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Berkstresser v. VoightNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Brock v. Western National Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. HobbsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
  5. H. E. Atterbury v. A. S. v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963

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

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

Powered by the Exa API