N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 24 / Article 1
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 24-1-14 (2026)

[Sterilization;] special qualifications prohibited.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
No hospital which permits any operation that results in sterilization to be performed
therein or medical staff of such hospital shall require any person upon whom a
sterilization operation is to be performed to meet any special qualifications which are not
imposed on individuals seeking other types of operations in the hospital.

History: 1953 Comp., § 12-34-14, enacted by Laws 1973, ch. 359, § 14.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

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

Law reviews. — For comment, "Voluntary Sterilization in New Mexico: Who Must
Consent?" see 7 N.M.L. Rev. 121 (1976-77).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 39 Am. Jur. 2d Health § 74.

Legality of voluntary nontherapeutic sterilization, 35 A.L.R.3d 1444.

When statute of limitations begins to run against malpractice action in connection with
sterilization or birth control procedures, 93 A.L.R.3d 218.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1964–1982 · leading case: Sierra Blanca Sales Co. v. Newco Indus., Inc., 542 P.2d 52 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sierra Blanca Sales Co. v. Newco Indus., Inc., 542 P.2d 52 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 4× “Section 24-1-14, N.M.S.A. 1953 provides: "24-1-14.”
Garrison v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc., 392 P.2d 580 (N.M. 1964). · cites it 3× “In § 24-1-14, it is said that the release, under certain circumstances, has the effect of reducing the “claim” of the injured person against other tortfeasors, while in § 24-1-15, the same right is spoken of as “damages recoverable.” Appellants’ contention that plaintiff’s…”
Johnson v. City of Las Cruces, 521 P.2d 1037 (N.M. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 2× “Section 24-1-14, N.M.S.A.1953 (Vol. 5) provides: A release by the injured person of one [1]joint tortfeasor, whether before or after judgment, does not discharge the other tortfeasors unless the release so provides; but reduces the claim against the other tortfeasors in the…”
Kirby v. New Mexico State High. Dep't, 643 P.2d 256 (N.M. Ct. App. 1982). “However, the Uniform Act protects the right of a non-settling joint tortfeasor to collect contribution from the one released unless the release provides for a reduction, to the extent mentioned in § 24-1-14, N.”
Langham v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 543 P.2d 484 (N.M. 1975). · cites it 2× “If Beech and Ross both are to be held responsible to plaintiffs for the wrongful death of the passengers in the airplane, it will be because they are joint tortfeasors.”
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.