DocketNumber: 29,993
Filed Date: 9/20/2011
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 10/30/2014
1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see 2 Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please 3 also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other 4 deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the 5 filing date. 6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 7 NICOLE NELLIS, for herself 8 and all others similarly situated, 9 Plaintiff-Appellee, 10 v. NO. 29,993 11 MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, 12 Defendant-Appellant. 13 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 14 Clay Campbell, District Judge 15 Myers, Oliver & Price, P.C. 16 Floyd D. Wilson 17 Albuquerque, NM 18 Freedman, Boyd, Hollander, 19 Goldberg, Ives & Duncan, P.A. 20 David Freedman 21 Joseph Goldberg 22 Albuquerque, NM 23 Eaves & Mendenhall, P.A. 24 John M. Eaves 25 Karen Mendenhall 26 Albuquerque, NM 27 Law Office of Alan Konrad 1 Alan Konrad 2 Albuquerque, NM 2 1 Peifer, Hanson & Mullins, P.A. 2 Charles R. Peifer 3 Robert E. Hanson 4 Albuquerque, NM 5 Dennis M. McCary 6 Albuquerque, NM 7 Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd LLP 8 Rachel Jensen 9 San Diego, CA 10 11 for Appellees 12 Rodey, Dickason, Sloan, Akin & Robb, P.A. 13 Andrew G. Schultz 14 Albuquerque, NM 15 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 16 Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. 17 Christopher Chorba 18 Los Angeles, CA 19 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP 20 Darrel J. Hieber 21 Los Angeles, CA 22 for Appellants 23 DECISION 24 BUSTAMANTE, Judge. 25 This is the companion case to Nellis v. Farmers Insurance Company of Arizona, 26 COA No. 29,295 decided today. The factual background here is identical to that in 3 1 Farmers. Perhaps because this case was decided below by a different trial judge, the 2 procedural posture is slightly different. However, we have determined that the 3 differences do not materially affect the legal analysis in any way that would prevent 4 our Opinion in Farmers from controlling the outcome here. 5 Therefore, relying on Farmers, we reverse and remand for dismissal. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 9 WE CONCUR: 10 11 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 12 13 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Judge 4