Graham v. Stoneham, 73 N.M. 382, 388 P.2d 389 (N.M. 1963)
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited opinion.
- Citation: 73 N.M. 382, 388 P.2d 389 (1963) (decided Oct. 21, 1963)
- Court / Year: Supreme Court of New Mexico, 1963
- Topic tags: election_of_remedies · forfeiture · remedies
- Facts: A seller under a contract for the sale of land, after the buyer’s default, repossessed the property and then sought further recovery from the buyer.
- Holding: When a buyer defaults on a contract for the sale of land and the seller repossesses, that “constitutes an election of remedies and amounts to a rescission of the contract, precluding further recovery from the buyer.”
- Reasoning: Repossession and rescission are inconsistent with also suing the buyer on the contract; a seller cannot both take back the land (keeping payments) and pursue the buyer for the balance or damages.
- Practical impact for CFD operators/buyers: The foundational New Mexico election-of-remedies rule for land contracts, applied in Buckingham v. Ryan (to bar damages after forfeiture) and Armstrong v. Csurilla (and its converse — suit on the debt bars later repossession).
- Good-law status: Good law; relied on in Buckingham (1998) and Armstrong (1991).
- Source (retrieved): https://static.case.law/nm/73/cases/0382-01.json · Verified: 2026-06-08
Jurisdictions that follow / cite: new-mexico
Disclaimer. Legal information, not legal advice. Confirm the opinion is still good law before relying on it.