New Mexico Statutes
N.M. Stat. § 23-1-1 (2026)
[Rules and regulations; equipment; employees.]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NM-LEGnmonesource.com
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The boards of each of said institutions shall have power, and it shall be their duty, to
pass and enforce bylaws, rules and regulations for the government of such institutions,
for the proper carrying out of their several objects, not in conflict with the laws of the
state of New Mexico, or any act of congress, and to provide all proper and necessary
books, apparatus, instruments, medicines, clothing, food and supplies, and other
materials or things necessary for the proper conduct of the several institutions
hereinbefore named and the care, support and protection of the inmates thereof when
necessary; also to employ all teachers, physicians, wardens or superintendents and
employes [employees], and to prescribe the duties and compensation of each, and they
shall have full power to remove or discharge any officer or employe [employee]
appointed or selected by them in any of such institutions, when in their judgment the
interest of such institution shall require.
History: Laws 1903, ch. 2, § 7; Code 1915, § 5110; C.S. 1929, § 130-607; 1941 Comp.,
§ 5-102; 1953 Comp., § 13-3-2.
ANNOTATIONS
Bracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and is not
part of the law.
Compiler's notes. — This section and 13-3-1, 1953 Comp., now compiled as 21-5-2
NMSA 1978, originally were enacted by Laws 1903, ch. 2, which created the New
Mexico asylum for the deaf and dumb, the New Mexico reform school, the New Mexico
institute for the blind and the miners' hospital of New Mexico. The government of such
institutions is now controlled by the constitution of New Mexico and supplementary laws.
This section may be superseded by 21-6-1 NMSA 1978, relating to powers and
authority of the board of regents of the New Mexico school for the deaf, 21-5-2 NMSA
1978, relating to the management of the New Mexico school for the visually
handicapped and by 23-3-2 to 23-3-4 NMSA 1978, relating to the board of trustees of
the miners' hospital.
Laws 1903, ch. 2, §§ 1 to 4, refer to the New Mexico asylum for the deaf and dumb, the
New Mexico reform school, the New Mexico institute for the blind and the miners'
hospital of New Mexico. The first three of these institutions are now known as the New
Mexico school for the deaf, at Sante Fe; the New Mexico boys' school, at Springer; and
the New Mexico school for the visually handicapped, at Alamogordo. See N.M. Const.,
art. XII, § 11 and art. XIV, § 1.
Cross references. — For exemptions from income tax, see 7-2-4 NMSA 1978.
Employee must comply with internal grievance procedures. — An employee must
substantially comply with mandatory internal grievance procedures contained in an
employee manual or handbook before filing suit for breach of contract claims based on
an alleged failure of an employer to follow its employment policies. Lucero v. Bd. of
Regents of UNM, 2012-NMCA-055, 278 P.3d 1043, cert. denied, 2012-NMCERT-004.
Where a university manager was terminated by the university; the manager did not
follow the grievance process contained in the university’s employee handbook by filing a
grievance; the handbook governed the manager’s employment with the university; and
the manager filed an action in district court for breach of contract and wrongful
termination alleging that the employee handbook created a contract and that the
university breached the contract by failing to abide by the handbook’s policies and
procedures governing workplace performance, disciplinary action, a harassment-free
workplace, employer-employee relations, progressive discipline and by disciplining the
manager without just cause, the manager’s claims were barred because the manager
failed to exhaust the handbook’s internal grievance procedures before filing the breach
of contract action based on an alleged failure of the university to follow policies in the
handbook. Lucero v. Bd. of Regents of UNM, 2012-NMCA-055, 278 P.3d 1043, cert.
denied, 2012-NMCERT-004.
Power to adopt rules and regulations. — By virtue of this section, the board of
managers of the miners' hospital is empowered to adopt reasonable rules and
regulations for the protection of the inmates, and to expel patients who refuse to comply
with the regulations. 1917 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 17-1966.
Liability of board for negligence. — While the members of the board of the New
Mexico school for the deaf and the institution cannot be held liable for negligence in the
promulgation of rules and regulations and ensuing misfortunes and accidents, if they
make negligent or malicious determinations in individual cases and accidents result
which are the sole, direct and proximate results of such determinations, it is possible
that they may be held personally liable. The circumstances of each case will be the
basis for ascertaining whether there has been negligence. 1960 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 60-
221.
Miners' hospital board has power to remove or discharge any employee, but it
must exercise this power in accordance with the rules promulgated by the personnel
board. 1964 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 64-130.
Including physician. — The miners' hospital board may dismiss a physician in their
employment for not abiding by the rules and regulations of the hospital board, but the
physician has the right to appeal the dismissal to the personnel board. 1964 Op. Att'y
Gen. No. 64-130.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Denial by hospital of staff privileges or
referrals to physician or other health care practitioner as violation of Sherman Act (15
USCS § 1 et seq.), 89 A.L.R. Fed. 419.Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1969–1988 · leading case: Howell Ex Rel. Howell v. Burk, 568 P.2d 214 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977).
Howell Ex Rel. Howell v. Burk, 568 P.2d 214 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Since injury could occur years after the construction project had been completed, the builder was exposed to liability years after the action or event alleged to be the basis for requiring him to pay damages.”
Peralta v. Martinez, 564 P.2d 194 (N.M. Ct. App. 1977). “Claiming the statute of limitation had run, Dr. Martinez moved for summary judgment.”
Chisholm v. Scott, 526 P.2d 1300 (N.M. Ct. App. 1974). “The general statute § 23-1-1, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Vol. 5) reads as follows: "23-1-1.”
Montanez v. Cass, 546 P.2d 1189 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976). “Section 23-1-1, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Vol. 5). This is a matter of first impression in New Mexico.”
Burns v. Bell, 409 A.2d 614 (D.C. 1979). “2d 246 (1976); N.M.Stat.Ann. §§ 23-1-1, 23-1-8, 58-33-13; N.”
Allison v. First Nat'l Bank in Albuquerque, 511 P.2d 769 (N.M. Ct. App. 1973). “On the other hand, if a cause of action accrues immediately upon issuance of the cashier's check or within a reasonable period of time after issue, then the period of limitation under §§ 23-1-1 and 23-1-3, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Vol.”
Akre v. Washburn, 590 P.2d 635 (N.M. 1979). “1978 (formerly §§ 23-1-1 and 4, N.M.S.A. 1953) provide that an action for accounts and unwritten contracts may be brought within four years after the cause of action accrues.”
Spurlin v. Paul Brown Agency, Inc., 454 P.2d 963 (N.M. 1969). “The pertinent provisions of the applicable statutes, §§ 23-1-1 and 23-1-4, N.M.S.A. 1953, read: “23-1-1.”
Bd. of Educ., Sch. Dist. 16 v. Standhardt, 458 P.2d 795 (N.M. 1969). “V of the Session Laws of 1880 and now appearing as § 23-1-1 through § 23-1-19, N.M.S.A. 1953), with few amendments are applicable in all actions brought by or against bodies corporate or politic except when otherwise expressly declared.”
Romero Ex Rel. Romero v. New Mexico Health & Env't Dep't, 760 P.2d 1282 (N.M. 1988). “Further, “any particular statute of this state,” to which reference is made in Section 23-1-17, would be a statute outside of those sections included within Sections 23-1-1 to 23-1-19 that were enacted originally under Laws 1880, Chapter 5, Sections 1 to 19.”
First W. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Home Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 499 P.2d 694 (N.M. Ct. App. 1972). “Sections 23-1-1 and 23-1-3, N.M.S.A. 1953 provide that actions founded on contracts in writing may be brought within six years, “after their causes accrue, and not afterwards.”
Fidel v. Fidel, 532 P.2d 579 (N.M. 1975). “The applicable statutes of limitation which appear as §§ 23-1-1, 23-1-3 & 23-1-18, N.M.S.A.19S3, provide: “23-1-1.”
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.