{
  "id": 1582043,
  "name": "STATE ex rel. PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INS. CO. v. ARLEDGE, Judge",
  "name_abbreviation": "State ex rel. Pacific Employers Ins. v. Arledge",
  "decision_date": "1950-08-12",
  "docket_number": "No. 5333",
  "first_page": "267",
  "last_page": "268",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 N.M. 267"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "221 P.2d 562"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.M.",
    "id": 8835,
    "name": "Supreme Court of New Mexico"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 52,
    "name_long": "New Mexico",
    "name": "N.M."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 186,
    "char_count": 1621,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.672,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0139799957427667e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5429445886613466
    },
    "sha256": "3ecba7466a66b80546ee3ffc4f1d1cd7ed9fcc38dea9fa40272b9a5e0ee9663c",
    "simhash": "1:420a649c4f0568b2",
    "word_count": 259
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:07:53.890113+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "BRICE, C. J., and LUJAN, SADLER, McGHEE and COMPTON, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE ex rel. PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INS. CO. v. ARLEDGE, Judge."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nThe respondent as judge of Division II of the Second Judicial District within and for Bernalillo County, in cause No. 44,367, pending on the civil docket of said court, entitled \u201cAugust Aloysius Lauman, Claimant, v. Valley Gold Dairies, Inc., Employers and Pacific Employers Insurance Company, Insurer, Defendants,\u201d declined to disqualify himself following the filing of statutory affidavit pursuant to 1941 Comp. \u00a7 19-508. The ground advanced for the position taken is that prosecution of a claim under 1941 Comp., Chapter 57, Article 9, \u00a7\u00a7 57-901 to 57-927, known as the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act is not a \u201cproceeding\u201d within the true intendment of the disqualification statute. It has been uniformly so treated ever since enactment of this statute, both by the bench and the bar of this state, until now. Such unanimous recognition for nearly twenty years suggests the practice has good reason to support it. We find such to he the case. Accordingly, respondent\u2019s order striking the affidavit of disqualification is a nullity. There was no jurisdiction to act. The alternative writ heretofore issued will be made permanent.\nIt is so ordered.\nBRICE, C. J., and LUJAN, SADLER, McGHEE and COMPTON, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Waldo H. Rogers, C. Vance Mauney, Hugh R. Horne, all of Albuquerque, for petitioner.",
      "Rodey, Dickason & Sloan, Simms, Mo-1 drall, Seymour & Simms, all of Albuquerque, amici curiae.",
      "Lorenzo A. Chavez, W. T. O\u2019Sullivan, Joseph L. Smith, all of Albuquerque, for respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "221 P.2d 562\nSTATE ex rel. PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INS. CO. v. ARLEDGE, Judge.\nNo. 5333.\nSupreme Court of New Mexico.\nAug. 12, 1950.\nWaldo H. Rogers, C. Vance Mauney, Hugh R. Horne, all of Albuquerque, for petitioner.\nRodey, Dickason & Sloan, Simms, Mo-1 drall, Seymour & Simms, all of Albuquerque, amici curiae.\nLorenzo A. Chavez, W. T. O\u2019Sullivan, Joseph L. Smith, all of Albuquerque, for respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0267-01",
  "first_page_order": 291,
  "last_page_order": 292
}