Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 N.M. 294 - Cone v. Amoco Production Company

Cone v. Amoco Production Company’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 1978
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Cave v. Cave · Tome Land & Improvement Co. v. Silva · Floyd Williams v. Humble Oil & Refining Company · Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Millette · 163 So. 2d 406 - Breaux v. Pan American Petroleum Corporation

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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is well settled in New Mexico that the appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court in weighing the evidence. If the trial court’s findings are supported by substantial evidence, they must be affirmed. Cave v. Cave, 81 N.M. 797 , 474 P.2d 480 (1970). Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might find adequate to support a conclusion. Cave v. Cave, supra.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.