N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 10 / Article 11
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 10-11-1 (2026)

Short title.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
Chapter 10, Article 11 NMSA 1978 may be cited as the "Public Employees
Retirement Act".

History: Laws 1987, ch. 253, § 1.

                                     ANNOTATIONS
Repeals and reenactments. — Laws 1987, Chapter 253 repealed former 10-11-1
NMSA 1978, as amended by Laws 1985 (1st S.S.), ch. 10, § 1, relating to definitions,
and enacted the above section, effective July 1, 1987.

Compiler's notes. — Laws 1987, ch. 59 purported to amend this section, but was not
published because of the repeal and reenactment by Laws 1987, ch. 253. See 12-1-8
NMSA 1978.

Recovery of worker's compensation benefits and benefits under this article. — A
worker is not precluded from recovering benefits under both the Public Employees'
Retirement Act and the Workers' Compensation Act. Montney v. State ex rel. State
Highway Dep't, 1989-NMCA-002, 108 N.M. 326, 772 P.2d 360.

Legislative retirement provisions unconstitutional. — The legislative retirement
provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Act, Chapter 10, Article 11 NMSA 1978,
are unconstitutional, invalid and unenforceable: Legislators may receive only per diem
and mileage under N.M. Const., art. IV, § 10. 1987 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 87-62.

The public employee retirement association possesses the legal authority to
deduct union dues, and the administrative costs of such deductions, from
pension benefits. — The Public Employees Retirement Act (act) does not address
whether the public employees retirement association (PERA) may deduct union dues
for its beneficiaries that are also union members, but it does appear that the policy
purpose behind the act is to ensure that members benefit from a state-backed
retirement plan that accounts for membership needs, including remittance or
withholding of funds on behalf of its members, and therefore, where a subsection of
PERA's beneficiaries sought dues deductions from their respective benefit amounts for
union membership, PERA had the legal authority to deduct union dues from pension
benefits of PERA members who are also members of unions. Furthermore, if this
subsection of beneficiaries consent to absorbing the administrative costs that
accompany the deductions and subsequent remittances to the unions, the subject
beneficiaries are knowingly and willingly accepting those administrative costs, which
would also appear to comply with the act. PERA Deduction of Dues from PERA
Retirement Benefits for RPENM and AFSCME Members and Reimbursement of
PERA's Administrative Costs for the Dues Deduction (8/25/21), Att'y Gen. Adv. Ltr.
2021-09.

Law reviews. — For note and comment: "For This Right There is a Remedy: The New
Mexico Supreme Court's Application of Ex Parte Young to Allow Suits Against the State
in Gill v. Public Employees Retirement Board", see 35 N.M.L. Rev. 501 (2005).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 60A Am. Jur. 2d Pensions and
Retirement Funds §§ 85, 1603 to 1737.

Employer's liability, under state law, for fraud or misrepresentation inducing employee to
take early retirement, 14 A.L.R.5th 537.
Construction and application of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
USCA §§ 1001 et seq.) by United States Supreme Court, 150 A.L.R. Fed. 441.

67 C.J.S. Officers and Public Employees §§ 243 to 249; 70 C.J.S. Pensions and
Retirement Plans and Benefits §§ 1 to 6, 19 to 110; 81 A C.J.S. States §§ 112 to 119.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993). · cites it 8× “253, § 140 (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.”
State Ex Rel. Helman v. Gallegos, 871 P.2d 1352 (N.M. 1994). · cites it 3× “253, §§ 1-143 (compiled as NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -138 (Repl.Pamp.”
Gzaskow v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 2017 NMCA 64 (N.M. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “{1} In 2011, Plaintiff Michael Gzaskow retired from employment with the State of New 1 Mexico and began receiving retirement pension benefits pursuant to the Public Employees Retirement Act (the Act), NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -142 (1987, as amended through 2016).”
Gilmore v. Gilmore, 227 P.3d 115 (N.M. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to - 142 (1987, as amended through 2009).”
Pierce v. State Ex Rel. New Mexico Taxation & Revenue Dep't, 910 P.2d 288 (N.M. 1995). · cites it 2× “Class A Appellants are those persons who received a pension prior to January 1, 1990, under the Public Employees Retirement Act (PERA), NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -141 (Repl.Pamp.”
Antillon v. New Mexico State High. Dep't, 820 P.2d 436 (N.M. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “The fringe benefits at issue in this appeal are group insurance and retirement benefits available to claimant under the Public Employees’ Retirement Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -38 (Repl.Pamp.1983 & Cum.”
State ex rel. Pub. Employees Ret. Ass'n v. Longacre, 2001 NMCA 076 (N.M. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “2(A) {7} PERA was established by the Public Employees Retirement Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -141 (1987, as amended through 1999), as a state agency responsible for administering the retirement program for its qualified members.”
State Ex Rel. Stratton v. Roswell Indep. Schs., 806 P.2d 1085 (N.M. Ct. App. 1991). “1990) (State Personnel Act); and §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.1990) (Public Employees Retirement Act).”
Wood v. State of New Mexico Educ. Ret. Bd., 2011 NMCA 20 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). “” The court first compared the Educational Retirement Act, Sections 22-11-1 to -53, the Public Employees Retirement Act (PERA), NMSA 1978, Sections 10-11-1 to -142 (1987, as amended through 2010), the Judicial Retirement Act (JRA), NMSA 1978, Section 10-12B-2(M) (2003) (defining…”
Wood v. New Mexico Educ. Ret. Bd., 250 P.3d 881 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). “" The court first compared the Educational Retirement Act, Sections 22-11-1 to -53, the Public Employees Retirement Act (PERA), NMSA 1978, Sections 10-11-1 to -142 (1987, as amended through 2010), the Judicial Retirement Act (JRA), NMSA 1978, Section 10-12B-2(M) (2003) (defining…”
Singhas v. New Mexico State High. Dep't, 902 P.2d 1077 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “1992); and earn credits for retirement benefits under one state retirement plan in accordance with the Public Employees Retirement Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -141 (Repl.Pamp.”
Talamante v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 2006 NMCA 032 (N.M. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “]” While the federal statute requires consideration of the national economy in determining whether an employee is disabled, see 42 U.S.C. § 423 (d)(2)(A) (2004), our New Mexico statute makes no mention of any geographic area to be considered.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— N.M. Stat. § 10-11-1(1) — 1 case
Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993). “253, § 140 (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.”
— N.M. Stat. § 10-11-1(L) — 1 case
Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993). “253, § 140 (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.”
— N.M. Stat. § 10-11-1(T) — 1 case
Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993). “253, § 140 (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.”
— N.M. Stat. § 10-11-1(Z) — 1 case
Rainaldi v. Pub. Employees Ret. Bd., 857 P.2d 761 (N.M. 1993). “253, § 140 (codified at NMSA 1978, §§ 10-11-1 to -140 (Repl.Pamp.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.