State Ex Rel. Castillo Corp. v. New Mexico State Tax Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that a mandamus proceeding compels performance of a plainly required duty and “is not a suit against the [s]tate”
• stating that the appellate courts will not give persuasive weight to an agency’s longstanding misapplication or misinterpretation of law
• stating that the court “would not interfere with the valid exercise of discretion by a state official” and that “the purpose of mandamus is to compel, not control”
• longstanding dereliction of duties by administrators is not to be equated with “long-standing interpretation”
• declining to address issue argued in amicus curiae brief where it was not within the issues raised by the parties, explaining that amicus curiae “must accept the case on the issues as raised by the parties, and cannot assume the functions of a party”
• mandamus proceeding requires performance of a plainly required duty and “is not a suit against the State”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).