N.M. Stat. » Chapter 22 — Public Schools
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 22-10-12 (2026)

Recompiled

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

ANNOTATIONS

Recompilations. — Laws 2003, ch. 153, § 72 recompiled former 22-10-12 NMSA 1978 as 22-10A-22 NMSA 1978, effective April 4, 2003.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1981–1997 · 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× “A person employed by such contract has no legitimate expectation of reemployment, and no contract shall be construed as "an implied promise of continued employment pursuant to a subsequent contract.”
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× “In the absence of notice of reemployment or termination, the teacher’s contract is automatically renewed for the ensuing year. § 22-10-12. In view of this provision for automatic renewal, the annual reemployment process resembles merely a procedure for regular review of the…”
Giangreco v. Murlless, 1997-NMCA-061, 943 P.2d 532. · cites it 10× “See NMSA 1978, § 22-10-12 (Repl. Pamp.1993) (“[T]he local school board .”
Provoda v. Maxwell, 808 P.2d 28 (N.M. 1991). · cites it 8× “Notice of reemployment; termination, NMSA 1978, Section 22-10-12 (Repl.Pamp.1989), 1 states in relevant part: On or before the last day of the school year of the existing employment contract, the local school board * * * shall serve written notice of reemployment or termination…”
Atencio v. Bd. of Educ. of Penasco, 655 P.2d 1012 (N.M. 1982). “It provides: Sections 22-10-12 through 22-10-15 NMSA 1978 do not apply to the following: ****** B.”
Bd. of Educ. of Taos Mun. Sch. v. Singleton, 712 P.2d 1384 (N.M. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “That delay cannot be utilized as a basis for depriving her of her position as a tenured teacher. Taos Board also seeks to draw an unnecessary distinction between “termination” and “discharge” in dismissal of Singleton.”
Naranjo v. Bd. of Educ. of the Espanola Pub. Schs., 891 P.2d 542 (N.M. 1995). · cites it 3× “That section provides: “Except as provided in Section 22-10-12 NMSA 1978, a person employed by contract pursuant to this section has no legitimate objective expectancy of reemployment, and no contract entered into pursuant to this section shall be construed as an implied promise…”
NM State Bd. of Ed. v. Bd. of Ed., 624 P.2d 530 (N.M. 1981). · cites it 2× “§ 22-10-12. In view of this provision for automatic renewal, the annual reemployment process resembles merely a procedure for regular review of the teacher's performance rather than a procedure to "approve the employment" of a teacher.”
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.