N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 21 / Article 9
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 21-9-1 (2026)

[Establishment of state laboratory and office of state

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
chemist.]
    That there is hereby established a state chemical laboratory for the analysis and
examination of such foods, drugs, feeds, fertilizers and other material as the interests of
the state may demand. The said state chemical laboratory shall be established at the
New Mexico college of agriculture and mechanic arts [New Mexico state university], and
shall be in [the] charge of a professor of chemistry at the said college, who shall be
known as the state chemist of New Mexico. All chemical work which the public interests
of the state may demand shall be done by or be under the supervision of the said state
chemist. All charges for the work done by the said state chemist shall be just and
equitable, and all money collected for such work shall go into a fund for the
maintenance of the said state chemical laboratory.

History: Laws 1919, ch. 169, § 1; C.S. 1929, § 131-101; 1941 Comp., § 3-1001; 1953
Comp., § 4-13-1.

                                      ANNOTATIONS

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

Laws 1889, ch. 138, § 2, created and established the agricultural college and
agricultural experiment station of New Mexico, as an institution of learning. Laws 1893,
ch. 61, § 24, changed the name of the agricultural college and agricultural (experiment)
station of New Mexico to the New Mexico college of agriculture and mechanic arts.
Article XII, Section 11, of the constitution of New Mexico, as repealed and reenacted
November 8, 1960, further changed the name to the New Mexico state university. See
also 21-8-2 NMSA 1978.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 25 Am. Jur. 2d Drugs, Narcotics and
Poisons § 33; 35 Am. Jur. 2d Food § 13; 42 Am. Jur. 2d Inspection Laws §§ 6, 11.

Constitutionality, construction, and application of statutes relating to testing or sampling
of agricultural fertilizers, 105 A.L.R. 348, 147 A.L.R. 765.

Validity, construction, and application of statutes or ordinances relating to inspection of
food sold at retail, 127 A.L.R. 322.

3 C.J.S. Agriculture § 15; 15 C.J.S. Commerce § 9; 28 Supp. C.J.S. Drugs and
Narcotics §§ 8 to 10.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases, 1955–2009 · leading case: Grygorwicz v. Trujillo, 203 P.3d 865 (N.M. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Grygorwicz v. Trujillo, 203 P.3d 865 (N.M. 2009). · cites it 2× “2d at 12 (discussing Section 21-9-1 in the 1953 statutory compilation, recompiled as NMSA 1978, Section 39-1-1).”
Valley Bank of Com. v. Hilburn, 105 P.3d 294 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “1972) (analyzing the applicability of this provision when it was codified at NMSA 1953, § 21-9-1 (1917)). The Hilburns suggest that the applicability of Section 39-1-1 is a matter of policy, which we should resolve in favor of applying Section 39-1-1 to all cases.”
State v. Gonzales, 794 P.2d 361 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “2d 389 (1958) (Section 39-1-1, then codified as NMSA 1953, Section 21-9-1, applies only to non-jury cases).”
Laffoon v. Galles Motor Co., 450 P.2d 439 (N.M. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 13× “1953), and under § 21-9-1, N.M.S.A.1953. Three affidavits and a verified answer.”
Scofield v. JW Jones Constr. Co., 328 P.2d 389 (N.M. 1958). · cites it 6× “1929, now § 21-9-1, 1953 N.M.S.A. The losing party had moved the judgment be set aside and that another be entered in his favor which motion was not ruled upon for more than thirty days after it had been filed, and it was more than six months after the filing of the judgment…”
Wooley v. Wicker, 403 P.2d 685 (N.M. 1965). · cites it 6× “Insofar as the provisions that failure by the court to rule on a motion within 30 days shall be deemed a denial thereof, application is limited to motions filed within 30 days after entry of *6788 final judgments and decrees and during which period the court retains control…”
State v. Padilla, 582 P.2d 396 (N.M. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 4× “Section 21-9-1, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl.Vol. 4) gives a trial court jurisdiction over its final judgment in a non-jury trial for thirty days after entry of the final judgment.”
Gengler v. Phelps, 558 P.2d 62 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 4× “He relies on § 21-9-1, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 4, 1970), which in pertinent part reads as follows: ".”
Archuleta v. New Mexico State Police, 775 P.2d 745 (N.M. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 3× “The supreme court wrote: Insofar as the provisions [of Section 39-1-1, then codified as NMSA 1953, Section 21-9-1] that failure by the court to rule on a motion within 30 days shall be deemed a denial thereof, application is limited to motions filed within 30 days after entry of…”
Livingston v. Loffland Bros. Co., 524 P.2d 991 (N.M. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “Section 21-9-1, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol.”
Nat'l Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Baxter, 385 P.2d 956 (N.M. 1963). · cites it 3× “” Section 21-9-1, N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp., provides that if the court fails to rule on a motion directed against a judgment of the court within thirty days after the filing of the motion, such failure to rule shall be deemed a denial thereof.”
Martin v. Leonard Motor-El Paso, 402 P.2d 954 (N.M. 1965). · cites it 2× “2d 43 , and, since the obvious purpose of the motion is to direct the court's attention to the necessity for relief, the rule does not deprive the court of the power to act in the interest of justice when attention has been called to the need by means other than a motion. United…”
Show all 40 citing cases →
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.