Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 N.M. 343 - English v. Sanchez

English v. Sanchez’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2018

12 state decisions

60199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on State Ex Rel. Bliss v. Dority · Viramontes v. Fox · Nichols v. Nichols · Sims v. Craig · McGrail v. Fields

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A. Except for purchase-money mortgages and except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the spouses must join in all transfers, conveyances or mortgages or contracts to transfer, convey or mortgage any interest in community real property and separate real property owned by the spouses ... in joint tenancy or tenancy in common[.] Any transfer, conveyance, mortgage ... or contract to transfer, convey, [or] mortgage ... any interest in the community real property or in separate real property owned by the spouses as cotenants in joint tenancy or tenancy in common attempted to be made by either spouse alone in violation of the provisions of this section shall be void and of no effect[.] Except as provided in this section, either spouse may transfer, convey, [or] mortgage ... separate real property without the other's joinder. B. Nothing in this section shall affect the right of one of the spouses to transfer, convey, [or] mortgage ... any community real property or separate real property owned by the spouses as cotenants in joint tenancy or tenancy in common without the joinder of the other spouse, pursuant to a validly executed and recorded power of attorney as provided in Section 47-1-7 [.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] sales contract, valid at the time of execution, is valid as to after-acquired separate property, once transmuted by written agreement between the spouses. The fact that the property was held for an interim as an asset of the community may have rendered the contract void for purposes of selling community property, but the interim holding of the property by the community need not void the contract for the purpose of selling separate property that is acquired through transmutation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Our decisions since the passage of the Community Property Act of 1973 have con tinued to follow our earlier precedents and have found all contracts to convey community real property not joined by both spouses ‘void and of no effect,’ absent a validly executed and recorded power of attorney.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.