Varela v. Mounho’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 16 state decisions

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

1. “asserts that unless we hold that commercial dairies do not come within [Section] 59-10-4(A), ... our decision would be contrary to the purposes of the Workmen’s Compensation Act which is “to provide a humanitarian and economical system of compensation for injured workmen”, [sic] Graham v. Wheeler, [ 77 N.M. 455 , 423 P.2d 980 (1967)]. To achieve that purpose, plaintiff asserts the statute must be liberally construed in his favor. See Schiller v. Southwest Air Rangers, Inc., 87 N.M. 476 , 535 P.2d 1327 (1975). Plaintiff also asserts there must be liberal construction in order to obtain fundamental fairness. See Transport Indemnity Company v. Garcia, 89 N.M. 342 , 552 P.2d 473 (Ct.App. 1976). Our answer is that the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act “may not be disregarded in the name of liberal construction.” Graham v. Wheeler, supra. The asserted unfairness to farm laborers “is a matter of legislative policy, and we are bound to interpret and apply the law as it is given us.” Koger v. A.T. Woods, Inc., [ 38 N.M. 241 , 31 P.2d 255 (1934) ].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 760 F. Supp. 2d 1272 - Arnold v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona

2. “The Workmen’s Compensation Act shall not apply ... to employers of farm and ranch laborers. § 52-l-6(A), N.M.S.A.1978 (1979 Supp.).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cueto v. Stahmann Farms, Inc.