Tony Scarborough

Chavez sued his former employer, Manville Products Corp., alleging breach of an express or implied employment contract and retaliatory discharge after he was terminated following his refusal to participate in the company's lobbying efforts for federal asbestos legislation. The trial court granted summary judgment on the contract claims and a directed verdict on the retaliatory discharge claim. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the summary judgment, reasoning that Chavez's 1965 written employment agreement, which barred oral modifications and specified at-will status, precluded any contrary oral assurances or implied contract terms. The court reversed the directed verdict on retaliatory discharge, holding that Chavez presented sufficient evidence of a prima facie case that his termination was motivated by his refusal to engage in the lobbying activity, and remanded for a new trial on that issue alone with a preponderance standard and damages including emotional distress.

labor & employmentfree speech

The case involved a DWI arrest by a Los Alamos municipal police officer who pursued and stopped the defendant just over the county line in Santa Fe County after observing erratic driving. The defendant challenged the arrest under the Fresh Pursuit Act, arguing the officer lacked authority for an extraterritorial stop and arrest for a petty misdemeanor. The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and held that Section 31-2-8 of the Fresh Pursuit Act authorizes municipal police officers to make such arrests for DWI. The court reached this conclusion by interpreting the statute in pari materia with related laws, presuming legislative awareness of common-law fresh pursuit doctrine and DWI penalties, and determining that the legislature intended to expand extraterritorial arrest powers to include DWI offenses.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved borrowers who defaulted on a promissory note secured by a mobile home, after which the lender repossessed the collateral, placed it with a used-auto dealer, and sold it privately for $2,000 without advertising, resulting in a deficiency balance. The borrowers challenged the deficiency judgment, arguing that the sale violated UCC Article 9 because it was not commercially reasonable. The trial court granted the lender the deficiency amount plus interest and fees, finding sufficient notice and a commercially reasonable disposition. On appeal, the New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed, holding that private sales of collateral through regular commercial channels can be commercially reasonable even without public advertising, as the UCC recognizes sales to or through dealers when conducted fairly, and the record did not support a contrary finding. The court noted that commercial reasonableness turns on case-specific facts and that the burden rests on the creditor, but here the lack of advertising alone was not determinative.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case concerns a dispute between owners of undeveloped subdivision lots in New Mexico, their civic association VIA, and the original land developer Horizon. Lot owners sued VIA over allegedly improper assessments, failure to provide improvements, and related issues under indentures created during the land sales. VIA filed a third-party complaint seeking contribution or indemnity from Horizon, which the district court dismissed. The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the impleader did not satisfy Rule 1-014(A) because Horizon's potential liability was not derivative of or dependent on the claims against VIA, that impleading Horizon would unnecessarily complicate the litigation, and that the trial court retained discretion to dismiss even a timely third-party complaint. The court noted that VIA had not alleged an agency or control relationship that would support secondary liability.

procedurepropertybusiness & regulatory

In State v. Clark, Terry D. Clark pled guilty to the kidnapping and first-degree murder of nine-year-old Dena Lynn Gore after previously being convicted of similar crimes against a child, and a jury later imposed a death sentence. Clark appealed to the New Mexico Supreme Court, raising issues including the denial of his motion to withdraw the guilty plea (which he claimed was influenced by a gubernatorial commutation announcement), the timing of sentencing, jury arguments and instructions on aggravating circumstances and life sentences, victim impact testimony, and the validity of the "murder of a witness" aggravating factor. The court affirmed the convictions and death penalty, concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in accepting or refusing to withdraw the plea, that the statutory aggravating circumstance applied validly, and that none of the challenged rulings or instructions constituted reversible error.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute between Bernice Stanton and Gordon Jewelry Corporation over jewelry purchases and trades made in 1983 at a New Mexico store. Stanton alleged fraud and bad faith breach of contract after cooperating in an embezzlement investigation of the store manager, seeking rescission of the contract along with damages and punitive damages; Gordon Jewelry counterclaimed for amounts allegedly owed on the account. The trial court ordered the return of purchased jewelry to Stanton (with her paying $2,223.16 on the account) and awarded her $50,000 in punitive damages. On appeal, the court affirmed the orders regarding the jewelry and account payment but reversed the punitive damages award, finding it unsupported by the record. The opinion also noted potential attorney misconduct in pleadings and referred the matter to the disciplinary board.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityprocedure