New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 24-1-12 (2026)

Health certificates; filing.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Any person who operates or is employed in a health facility shall, upon becoming
employed or engaged in such occupation, present to the employer or, if self-employed,
file at the place of business a health certificate from a licensed physician stating the
person is free from communicable diseases in a transmissible state dangerous to the
public health as defined by regulation of the health services division [public health
division] of the health and environment department [department of health]. The
certificate shall be obtained not more than ninety days prior to the date of employment.

   B. All certificates shall be kept on file and be subject to inspection by the licensing
authority.

History: 1953 Comp., § 12-34-12, enacted by Laws 1973, ch. 359, § 12; 1981, ch. 46, §
1.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

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

Laws 1991, ch. 25, § 16 repealed former 9-7-4 NMSA 1978, relating to the health and
environment department and enacted a new 9-7-4 NMSA 1978 which created the
department of health. Section 9-7-5 NMSA 1978, as amended by Laws 1991, ch. 25, §
17, made the secretary of health the administrative head of the department.

Subsection B of 9-7-4 NMSA 1978 provided that all references to the "health services
division" shall be construed to be references to the "public health division".

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 39 Am. Jur. 2d Health § 56 et seq.

39A C.J.S. Health and Environment §§ 38, 39.
24-1-13. Pregnancy; capacity to consent to examination and
diagnosis.
   Any person, regardless of age, has the capacity to consent to an examination and
diagnosis by a licensed physician for pregnancy.

History: 1953 Comp., § 12-34-13, enacted by Laws 1973, ch. 359, § 13.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For standard serological test for syphilis for pregnant women, see
24-1-10 NMSA 1978.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Liability for incorrectly diagnosing
existence or nature of pregnancy, 2 A.L.R.5th 769.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1964–1990 · leading case: Watson Truck & Supply Co., Inc. v. Males, 801 P.2d 639 (N.M. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Watson Truck & Supply Co., Inc. v. Males, 801 P.2d 639 (N.M. 1990). · cites it 4× “1989)) and Subsection 24-1-12(3) (identical to the current Subsection 41-3-2(C)).”

Rio Grande Gas Co. v. Stahmann Farms, Inc., 457 P.2d 364 (N.M. 1969). · cites it 6× “I recognize, of course, that Stahmann was absolved of guilt, but on this appeal Rio Grande asserts this was error.”

Garrison v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc., 392 P.2d 580 (N.M. 1964). · cites it 3× “Section 24-1-12, N.M.S.A.1953. In this instance, Navajo and Putman paid plaintiff and took the release before Cement Company’s right to secure a money judgment for contribution from Navajo and Putman accrued.”

Bailey v. Jeffries-Eaves, Inc., 414 P.2d 503 (N.M. 1966). “20 and that loss of use cost him $120. These figures are not refuted and an award based thereon is proper.”

Bd. of Educ., Sch. Dist. 16 v. Standhardt, 458 P.2d 795 (N.M. 1969). “Such might well be a condition to the judgment, but would not be grounds for a dismissal of a cross-claim or a third-party complaint for the recovery of either indemnity or contribution.”

— N.M. Stat. § 24-1-12(2) — 1 case

Rio Grande Gas Co. v. Stahmann Farms, Inc., 457 P.2d 364 (N.M. 1969). “I recognize, of course, that Stahmann was absolved of guilt, but on this appeal Rio Grande asserts this was error.”

— N.M. Stat. § 24-1-12(3) — 2 cases

Watson Truck & Supply Co., Inc. v. Males, 801 P.2d 639 (N.M. 1990). “1989)) and Subsection 24-1-12(3) (identical to the current Subsection 41-3-2(C)).”

Rio Grande Gas Co. v. Stahmann Farms, Inc., 457 P.2d 364 (N.M. 1969). “I recognize, of course, that Stahmann was absolved of guilt, but on this appeal Rio Grande asserts this was error.”

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.