N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 22 / Article 10
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 22-10-1 (2026)

Recompiled.

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

Recompilations. — Laws 2003, ch. 153, § 33 recompiled and amended former 22-10-1
NMSA 1978, relating to the School Personnel Act, as 22-10A-1 NMSA 1978, effective
April 4, 2003.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1956–2010 · leading case: Swinney v. Deming Bd. of Educ., 873 P.2d 238 (N.M. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Swinney v. Deming Bd. of Educ., 873 P.2d 238 (N.M. 1994). · cites it 4× “All of these categories include individuals who are teachers who might otherwise be determined to be "certified school instructors" within the meaning of various provisions of the School Personnel Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 22-10-1 to -26 (Repl. Pamp.”
New Mexico State Bd. of Educ. v. Bd. of Educ. of Alamogordo Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 624 P.2d 530 (N.M. 1981). · cites it 2× “The nepotism statute makes no reference to the “reemployment” of teachers. In the absence of notice of reemployment or termination, the teacher’s contract is automatically renewed for the ensuing year.”
Bd. of Educ. of Alamogordo Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 1. v. Jennings, 701 P.2d 361 (N.M. 1985). · cites it 2× “Jennings argues, however, that the general rule of law regarding offset has been altered by the Certified School Personnel Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 22-10-1 to -26 (Repl.Pamp.1984).”
Larsen v. Farmington Mun. Schs., 242 P.3d 493 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “{3} After briefing on Defendant’s amended motion for summary judgment on the basis that Plaintiff did not file a timely request for a post-termination hearing, the district court denied the motion, ordered arbitration, and stayed the proceedings pending the outcome of an…”
Aguilera v. Bd. of Educ., 114 P.3d 322 (N.M. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “See NMSA1978, §§ 22-10-1 to -27 (1975, as amended through 2002).”
Bd. of Educ. of Alamogordo Pub. Schs. Dist. No. 1 v. Jennings, 651 P.2d 1037 (N.M. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “Section 22-10-11(A), supra, provides: *1045 All employment contracts between local school boards and certified school personnel and between governing authorities of state agencies and certified school instructors shall be in writing on forms approved by the state board.”
Santa Fe Pub. Schs. v. Romero, 2001 NMCA 103 (N.M. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “” Because the Board severed its employment relationship with Romero before his current annual contract had expired, Section 22-10-2(A) makes it clear that the discharge provisions of the Act — Sections 22-10-17 and -17.”
Atencio v. Bd. of Educ. of Penasco, Etc., 655 P.2d 1012 (N.M. 1982). “CIV 79-658(C) is a lawsuit by a tenured teacher who became an administrator in the Peñasco Independent School District and who was later refused reemployment as a teacher after he was discharged as Superintendent of that district.”
Stanley v. Raton Bd. of Educ., 876 P.2d 232 (N.M. 1994). · cites it 2× “After Stanley was served with a notice of intent to discharge by the Board, Stanley filed a petition for a writ of prohibition, alleging that the Board was without authority under the School Personnel Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 22-10-1 to -26 (Repl. Pamp.”
Rubio Ex Rel. Rubio v. Carlsbad Mun. Sch. Dist., 744 P.2d 919 (N.M. Ct. App. 1987). “’’ Relying on Section 41-4-21 as a general exception to immunity, plaintiffs then attempt to incorporate provisions of the Certified School Personnel Act, NMSA 1978, Sections 22-10-1 to -26 (Repl.1986 & Supp.”
Termination of Larsen v. Bd. of Educ., 242 P.3d 487 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “{3} On January 8, 2003, based primarily on the allegations of the student, Defendant’s Superintendent of Schools served Plaintiff with a notice of intent to recommend his discharge under the School Personnel Act (the Act), NMSA 1978, §§ 22-10A-1 to -39 (1967, as amended through…”
Stanley v. Raton Bd. of Educ., 876 P.2d 232 (N.M. 1994). · cites it 2× “After Stanley was served with a notice of intent to discharge by the Board, Stanley filed a petition for a writ of prohibition, alleging that the Board was without authority under the School Personnel Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 22-10-1 to -26 (Repl. Pamp.”
Show all 16 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.