N.M. Stat. » Chapter 21 — State and Private Education Institutions
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3 (2026)

[Board of regents; duty; educational standard.]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It shall be the duty of the board of regents to maintain and control, at Roswell, a military institute for the education and training of the youth of this country, of as high a standard as like institutions in other states and territories.

History: Laws 1893, ch. 41, § 4; C.L. 1897, § 3663; Code 1915, § 4990; C.S. 1929, § 120-2003; 1941 Comp., § 66-1303; 1953 Comp., § 73-28-3.

ANNOTATIONS

Bracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and is not part of the law.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1975–2019 · leading case: Miller v. City of Albuquerque, 540 P.2d 254 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Miller v. City of Albuquerque, 540 P.2d 254 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 11× “Section 21-12-3, supra. Accordingly, the issues in this appeal are limited to the contempt order and the order concerning attorney fees.”
Griego v. Grieco, 561 P.2d 36 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 4× “Section 21-12-3(a)(2), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl.”
Ortega v. Transamerica Ins., 569 P.2d 957 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 4× “Section 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol.”
Gallegos Ex Rel. Est. of Gallegos v. Franklin, 547 P.2d 1160 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “Defendants did not appeal from the order entered on December 23, 1974, denying defendanfs motions to set aside the default judgment.”
Michelson v. Michelson, 551 P.2d 638 (N.M. 1976). “The wife also asks for review under Rule 3(b), Rules of Appellate Procedure [§ 21-12-3(b), N.M.S.A., 1953 (Repl.Vol. 4, 1975 Supp.”
White v. Singleton, 539 P.2d 1024 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 4× “Section 21-12-3(h), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Int.Supp.”
Hort v. Gen. Elec. Co., 588 P.2d 560 (N.M. Ct. App. 1978). “] In the instant case plaintiff’s attorney neglected to prosecute the appeal to vacate the second judgment within the requisite time fixed by Rule 3 of the Rules Governing Appeals [§ 21-12-3, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, 1977 Supp.”
State v. Doe, 573 P.2d 1211 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “An order denying a motion for a new trial is not appealable under any of these provisions; neither is it appealable under Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals (§ 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, Supp.”
Weiss v. Hanes Mfg. Co., 568 P.2d 209 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Rules 3(a)(1) and 4(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals [§§ 21-12-3(a)(1) and 21-12-4(a), N.M.S.A.”
Serna v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs of Bernalillo Cnty., 540 P.2d 212 (N.M. 1975). “The Petitioners also have sought review of claimed error by the district court pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure for Civil Cases and Rules Governing Original Proceedings in the Supreme Court [§ 21-12-3(b), N.M.S.A.1953 (Int.Supp.1974)].”
State v. Doe, 573 P.2d 1211 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “An order denying a motion for a new trial is not appealable under any of these provisions; neither is it appealable under Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals (§ 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, Supp.”
IBEW v. City of Farmington, No. A-1-CA-36035 (N.M. Ct. App. Apr. 3, 2019). “XII, §§ 21-12-3, 21-12-4(a)(4) 21-12-9(a), 21-12-11(b)(10), 21-12-11(c).”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(a): 5 cases
Ortega v. Transamerica Ins., 569 P.2d 957 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Section 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol.”
Gallegos Ex Rel. Est. of Gallegos v. Franklin, 547 P.2d 1160 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976). “Defendants did not appeal from the order entered on December 23, 1974, denying defendanfs motions to set aside the default judgment.”
State v. Doe, 573 P.2d 1211 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “An order denying a motion for a new trial is not appealable under any of these provisions; neither is it appealable under Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals (§ 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, Supp.”
Miller v. City of Albuquerque, 540 P.2d 254 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). “Section 21-12-3, supra. Accordingly, the issues in this appeal are limited to the contempt order and the order concerning attorney fees.”
State v. Doe, 573 P.2d 1211 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “An order denying a motion for a new trial is not appealable under any of these provisions; neither is it appealable under Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals (§ 21-12-3(a), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, Supp.”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(a)(1): 2 cases
Miller v. City of Albuquerque, 540 P.2d 254 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). “Section 21-12-3, supra. Accordingly, the issues in this appeal are limited to the contempt order and the order concerning attorney fees.”
Weiss v. Hanes Mfg. Co., 568 P.2d 209 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Pursuant to Rules 3(a)(1) and 4(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals [§§ 21-12-3(a)(1) and 21-12-4(a), N.M.S.A.”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(a)(2): 1 case
Griego v. Grieco, 561 P.2d 36 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Section 21-12-3(a)(2), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl.”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(a)(4): 1 case
Miller v. City of Albuquerque, 540 P.2d 254 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). “Section 21-12-3, supra. Accordingly, the issues in this appeal are limited to the contempt order and the order concerning attorney fees.”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(a)(l): 1 case
Weiss v. Hanes Mfg. Co., 568 P.2d 209 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Pursuant to Rules 3(a)(1) and 4(a) of the Rules Governing Appeals [§§ 21-12-3(a)(1) and 21-12-4(a), N.M.S.A.”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(b): 2 cases
Michelson v. Michelson, 551 P.2d 638 (N.M. 1976). “The wife also asks for review under Rule 3(b), Rules of Appellate Procedure [§ 21-12-3(b), N.M.S.A., 1953 (Repl.Vol. 4, 1975 Supp.”
Serna v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs of Bernalillo Cnty., 540 P.2d 212 (N.M. 1975). “The Petitioners also have sought review of claimed error by the district court pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure for Civil Cases and Rules Governing Original Proceedings in the Supreme Court [§ 21-12-3(b), N.M.S.A.1953 (Int.Supp.1974)].”
N.M. Stat. § 21-12-3(h): 1 case
White v. Singleton, 539 P.2d 1024 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). “Section 21-12-3(h), N.M.S.A. 1953 (Int.Supp.”
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.