Eugene D. Lujan

The case involved the Public Service Company of New Mexico seeking Commission approval to construct a transmission line or transmit power to a proposed cement plant site in Socorro County, with the Socorro Electric Cooperative intervening to claim it could and should provide the service instead. The Commission allowed limited intervention but ruled it lacked jurisdiction over the Cooperative, granted the requested authority to the Public Service Company, and the district court affirmed that order. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Cooperative is not a public utility under the Public Utility Act because it is limited by statute to serving its members (plus limited others) rather than the public generally and is expressly exempt from Commission regulation under the Rural Electric Cooperative Act. As a result, the Commission had no authority to hear the Cooperative's complaint about interference under the territorial protection provisions of the Act.

business & regulatory

The case concerned a lawsuit by the plaintiff to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a 1955 Diamond T tractor-truck securing a promissory note, recover unpaid balances on notes for a drag-axle and leased tires, and related claims. The trial court granted foreclosure of the truck and tires, entered judgments on the notes including penalties and fees, and dismissed the insurance premium claim. On appeal, the court affirmed, reasoning that equitable estoppel was not pleaded as an affirmative defense, the mortgage lien was valid and enforceable in equity without possession by the mortgagee, the tires were reachable under the mortgage or leases, and the trial court's findings were supported by substantial evidence.

propertyprocedure

This case involved lessors seeking to cancel a lease for a mineral water well in New Mexico after the lessee and assignee stopped using water from the well for vapor baths, switched to city water mixed with dry minerals, and ceased paying royalties based on the lease's gallonage terms. The trial court ruled for the assignee, finding no breach of the lease terms. The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed, holding that the lease is governed by principles from oil and gas law and includes an implied covenant requiring the lessee to use reasonable diligence in marketing the mineral water to generate royalties for the lessors, as that was their primary compensation. The court remanded for a determination of whether the covenant was breached and, if so, whether cancellation is warranted, while rejecting claims for an accounting on city water use.

property

This case involved an appeal by defendant J.T. Ferguson from his conviction in district court for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of Roswell city Ordinance No. 686, after he was initially found guilty in municipal court. The court determined that testimony from two police officers about the defendant's driving without headlights, weaving in traffic, strong odor of alcohol, unsteady gait, and impaired speech constituted substantial evidence supporting a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court affirmed the conviction and fine but reversed the one-year suspension of the defendant's driver's license. It held that state statutes vest sole authority to revoke driver's licenses in the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, not in the trial court, which must instead forward the license and conviction record to the appropriate division for revocation proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

In Conley v. Quinn, plaintiff Ola Conley sued to quiet title to alleged community interests in two tracts of real estate (the Yeakley and Austin tracts), certain personal property including notes and cash, and improvements made to her late husband A.J. Conley's separate property, following their 1939 marriage when he was 71 and she was 43. The trial court found no community property existed, based on findings that the properties were acquired or maintained with the husband's separate funds, including proceeds from a pre-marriage school section lease that was renewed during the marriage and sold for $10,000. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed in most respects, holding that the presumption of community property was rebutted by a preponderance of evidence showing separate character, but on rehearing it held that a 160-acre portion of the Austin tract was community property subject to reimbursement, and it directed that exempt household furnishings be set aside to the widow under statute regardless of character. The core reasoning centered on tracing funds to separate sources and the legal effect of lease renewals creating new estates.

family lawproperty

The case involved claims for property damage from flooding allegedly caused by improperly designed and constructed culverts in a river detour during bridge construction by Metropolitan Paving Company under contract with the City of Santa Fe, with engineering plans by Gordon Herkenhoff & Associates. The City and Metropolitan filed claims against Herkenhoff for negligence in the design, but Herkenhoff sought summary judgment based on an indemnity clause in the contract that protected the engineer from suits related to the construction. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that the broad language of the indemnity provision, which covered acts of omission or malfeasance, intended to indemnify Herkenhoff even for its own negligence. The decision relied on the rule that explicit reference to negligence is not required if the intent to indemnify against it is clear from the contract terms.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

This case involved a tort claim by plaintiff Ralph Wolf against defendants Perry and Lowry for allegedly inducing a breach of an exclusive five-year gasoline sales contract originally between Wolf and property owner Max Konz. Konz sold the Moriarty, New Mexico property to Frank Maurale, who declined to honor the contract after being advised by his attorney that it was not binding on him; the complaint was amended to drop claims against Konz and Maurale and focus on the defendants' alleged inducement. The trial court had found liability, but the New Mexico Supreme Court reversed, holding that the evidence was insufficient to show any wrongful persuasion or inducement by the defendants after any novated contract with Maurale came into existence. The court noted that the defendants' solicitations and actions, such as offering open-market gasoline or painting the station Phillips colors, either predated any binding contract or did not constitute inducement to breach, and this was not a claim for interference with prospective advantage. The judgment was reversed with directions to dismiss the complaint with prejudice.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

The case involved defendants convicted by a jury in San Miguel County district court of operating a game of chance for money and permitting such a game on their premises at Joe's Ringside Inn. The defendants appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing their requested jury instruction on entrapment after undercover police officers were invited to and participated in a dice game. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that there was no entrapment because the defendants were already engaged in operating gambling activities and possessed related paraphernalia before the officers arrived, and the officers merely provided an opportunity to commit the offense rather than inducing an otherwise innocent person to violate the law.

criminal law

The case involved Charles Harris, who was cited for parking his car within 20 feet of a crosswalk in violation of a city ordinance in Alamogordo, New Mexico. After refusing the citation issued by 19-year-old police officer Wanda Napier and failing to appear, a complaint was filed leading to his conviction and a $25 fine in police court, which he appealed to district court where he was again found guilty. Harris argued that the complaint should be dismissed because Napier, as a minor, lacked legal capacity to issue the citation or execute the affidavit for the warrant. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that any competent witness with knowledge of the facts may issue a citation or make a complaint for ordinance violations, and state statutes do not disqualify a 19-year-old from serving in this role or acting as a witness.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by Copeland against his employer Black for an alleged abdominal injury sustained while lifting a steel beam on February 2, 1957. The district court dismissed the action, finding it barred by the statute of limitations under Section 59-10-13 because no written notice of the accident was given within thirty days and the employer lacked actual knowledge of the injury. On appeal, the New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the claimant's vague mention of a stomach ache to his foreman did not qualify as actual knowledge and that a later report provided months afterward did not satisfy the statutory notice requirement. The court reasoned that the notice provision exists to allow employers to investigate promptly and that the Act's liberal construction cannot override the explicit statutory bar on untimely claims without proper notice or knowledge.

labor & employment

The case involved a creditor's suit to set aside two transfers by defendant George Tessier as fraudulent conveyances made while litigation against him was pending: the March 1954 transfer of real estate to his wife and the April 1954 transfer of business assets to a newly formed corporation. The trial court ruled for the defendants on both claims, finding the real estate transfer was made in good faith to satisfy a preexisting debt owed to the wife. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed as to the real estate transfer, holding that it was supported by adequate consideration and lacked fraudulent intent, but reversed as to the corporate transfer, concluding that the circumstances showed an intent to hinder creditors and that the corporate entity should be disregarded to allow the plaintiff to reach the underlying assets.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case concerned a dispute over a permit issued by the New Mexico State Engineer allowing appellants Brown and Hoke to change the location of an existing water well in the Portales Underground Water Basin after they had already drilled and begun using the new well. Appellee Barnett, an adjoining appropriator, protested the application, and the trial court granted summary judgment in his favor, enjoining use of the relocated well. The Supreme Court of New Mexico reversed, holding that while the governing statute requires application, notice, hearing, and approval prior to any change in well location, an unauthorized change does not deprive the State Engineer of jurisdiction to consider and grant a permit afterward if existing rights are not impaired. The court remanded for further proceedings to determine whether the State Engineer's findings adequately addressed impairment of Barnett's water rights.

environmentpropertyprocedure

This case concerns the proper venue for challenging a price-fixing order issued by the New Mexico State Board of Barber Examiners. The petitioner filed suit in Bernalillo County, alleging constitutional violations and lack of due process in the Board's order setting minimum barber prices. The district court dismissed the case for improper venue, ruling it should have been filed in Santa Fe County. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Board qualifies as a state officer under the venue statute, which requires suits against state officers to be brought in the county of their official residence at the capitol. The court reasoned that the applicable statutes did not provide an exception or alternative venue for review of such price agreement orders.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

In this case, an employee sued his employer under New Mexico’s Workmen’s Compensation Act for an alleged workplace injury, and the employer denied any obligation to pay compensation or benefits. The employee requested a jury trial on all issues and separately asked the district court to order the employer to pay over $1,500 in additional medical and surgical expenses before liability was decided. The employer objected, arguing it was entitled to a jury determination of liability first. The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that a district court lacks power to compel medical or surgical treatment until the employer acknowledges liability or a court proceeding determines it, because such benefits are incidental to and dependent on a compensable injury under the Act.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case was an appeal from a district court judgment granting summary judgment to the Old Lincoln County Memorial Commission, a state agency, in a quiet title action filed by appellant Maes after an earlier injunction suit. The New Mexico Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that the commission is an instrumentality of the state, which cannot be sued without legislative consent, and that no such consent existed here. The relevant statute provided only limited consent for suits to adjudicate state liens or mortgages, not to extinguish the state's fee simple title, and sovereign immunity statutes must be strictly construed.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a boundary dispute over a small triangular parcel of land between two adjoining properties owned by the appellant and appellee. The appellant claimed ownership based on a 1927 deed describing her tract's northern boundary as 129 feet, bounded on the east by property of Willie Cortez, but the court found that call invalid since Cortez did not own the adjacent land at the time. The trial court dismissed the appellant's cross-complaint at the close of her evidence for failing to make a prima facie case, and the New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the distance call in the deed controlled over her claimed boundary line, with no valid calls for monuments or acquiescence established in her evidence.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a dispute over a six-year farming lease between a woman and her son-in-law, where the plaintiff sought cancellation claiming undue influence in procuring the lease and breach of an implied covenant to farm diligently. The trial court dismissed the case, citing res judicata among other reasons, and the New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal. The court found insufficient evidence to establish a fiduciary relationship that would presume undue influence, and determined that even if there was a breach of the implied covenant of good husbandry, the proper remedy was damages rather than lease cancellation absent an express provision allowing termination. The judgment in a prior case was not properly introduced to support res judicata.

propertyprocedurefamily law

This case involved a husband's suit for divorce from his wife on the ground of incompatibility after they had been married since 1943 but separated since 1946 and had no contact for over a decade. The trial court granted the divorce, finding the couple wholly incompatible due to differences in tastes, dispositions, and daily disagreements over meals and social plans, as supported by the husband's testimony. The wife appealed, arguing insufficient evidence of incompatibility. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the decree, holding that the trial court's findings were backed by substantial evidence and that under the applicable standard of review, such findings must be upheld, with the long separation further supporting the incompatibility determination.

family law

The case involved an out-of-state itinerant salesman convicted under a Town of Farmington ordinance imposing an occupation tax based on gross business volume for soliciting orders for tailor-made clothing shipped interstate. The trial court found him guilty of operating without the required license, and on appeal he argued that the tax violated the Commerce Clause as applied to his interstate activities. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, classifying him as a drummer engaged in interstate sales but holding the hybrid fixed-and-gross-receipts tax constitutional because it was not a flat license fee, his solicitation occurred over extended annual periods rather than sporadically, and it did not create multiple taxation or unduly burden interstate commerce. The court rejected claims of prior wrongful license denial or official misconduct as defenses and distinguished precedents like Robbins and Nippert.

business & regulatoryfederal powertaxes

This case was a libel action brought by a Methodist minister against a church official who signed a report, published in the church's official newspaper, condemning the plaintiff's charges against a bishop as false and accusing the plaintiff of unministerial conduct and deceit. The trial court dismissed the complaint, but the New Mexico Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the statements were libelous per se, that the church investigation and report were protected by qualified privilege rather than absolute privilege, and that the complaint adequately alleged malice to overcome the privilege. The court held that whether the privilege was abused is ordinarily a question for the jury, not the court on a motion to dismiss, and remanded for further proceedings.

torts & liabilityreligious liberty