New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 40-11-7 (2026)

Repealed.

✓ current as of May 2026

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

History: Laws 1986, ch. 47, § 7; repealed by Laws 2009, ch. 215, § 9.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

Repeals. — Laws 2009, ch. 215, § 19 repealed 40-11-7 NMSA 1978, as enacted by
Laws 1986, ch. 47, § 7, relating to determination of father and child relationship, who
may bring action and when action may be brought, effective January 1, 2010. For
provisions of former section, see the 2008 NMSA 1978 on NMOneSource.com. For
present comparable provisions, see the New Mexico Uniform Parentage Act, 40-11A-
101 to 40-11A-903 NMSA 1978.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases, 1989–2018 · leading case: Chatterjee v. King, 2011 NMCA 12 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Chatterjee v. King, 2011 NMCA 12 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 12× “We then evaluate Sections 40-11-7 and 40-11-21 to determine whether they are sufficient to grant Petitioner standing for custody as the child’s natural mother.”

Tedford v. Gregory, 959 P.2d 540 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “" Similarly, Section 40-11-8(A) permits an action to determine paternity to be combined with an action for support. Section 40-11-23(A) (1989) of the UPA provides that "[a]n action to determine a parent and child relationship under the [UPA] shall be brought no later than three…”

Chatterjee v. King, 2012 NMSC 19 (N.M. 2012). · cites it 2× “3d 198 , the Court of Appeals concluded that the use of the term “any interested party” in Sections 40-11-7 and 40-11-21, coupled with the extraordinary twenty-one year statute of limitations, Section 40-11-23, indicates the Legislature’s intent to apply the UPA broadly.”

Gutierrez v. Connick, 87 P.3d 552 (N.M. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “The court granted this motion, and Grandparents, now formally represented by counsel, filed an amended petition adding Father as a party and requesting that Father’s paternity be established pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 40-11-7 (1986) of the Uniform Parentage Act, NMSA 1978, §§…”

Callison v. Naylor, 777 P.2d 913 (N.M. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Such an action would be brought to determine whether a parent-child relationship exists between Sheila and the third party, see Section 40-11-7, an issue that has not been litigated in either the divorce proceeding or in this case.”

In Re Est. of DeLara, 38 P.3d 198 (N.M. Ct. App. 2001). “An action may be brought by “[a]ny interested party,” §§ 40-11-7 and -21, against an estate, § 40-11-8(C), and under an extraordinary statute of limitations, § 40-11-23 (allowing up to 21 years to bring a UPA action).”

State Ex Rel. Salazar v. Roybal, 963 P.2d 548 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “” Additionally, the Department asserts that it derives its authority when Section 27-2-27(D) is read together with Sections 40-11-7 and -23(A). We cannot agree that the Department has standing to bring this petition.”

State Ex Rel. Human Servs. Dep't v. Aguirre, 797 P.2d 317 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990). “See § 40-11-7. We disagree with respondent that the state’s involvement somehow necessitated a guarantee to a jury trial.”

Diamond v. Diamond, 2011 NMCA 2 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010). “{31} The version of New Mexico’s UPA at issue in the present ease and the version currently in effect both contemplate that an adult child may seek retroactive child support for the parent’s support obligations accruing prior to the child’s reaching the age of majority or…”

Chatterjee v. King, 253 P.3d 915 (N.M. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 6× “We then evaluate Sections 40-11-7 and 40-11-21 to determine whether they are sufficient to grant Petitioner standing for custody as the child's natural mother.”

DeGrande v. Demby, 529 N.W.2d 340 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). “§ 9:17-45 (West 1993); N.M.Stat.Ann. § 40-11-7 (Michie 1994); Ohio Rev.”

Urias v. Nieto (N.M. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “Thereafter, Respondent 9 filed a motion to dismiss arguing that Petitioner waived the right to request “back 10 pay” from him because the child had reached the age of majority, and therefore, 11 any action for retroactive child support belonged to “the now adult child.” After 12…”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— N.M. Stat. § 40-11-7(A) — 4 cases

Tedford v. Gregory, 959 P.2d 540 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998). “" Similarly, Section 40-11-8(A) permits an action to determine paternity to be combined with an action for support. Section 40-11-23(A) (1989) of the UPA provides that "[a]n action to determine a parent and child relationship under the [UPA] shall be brought no later than three…”

Gutierrez v. Connick, 87 P.3d 552 (N.M. Ct. App. 2003). “The court granted this motion, and Grandparents, now formally represented by counsel, filed an amended petition adding Father as a party and requesting that Father’s paternity be established pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 40-11-7 (1986) of the Uniform Parentage Act, NMSA 1978, §§…”

State Ex Rel. Salazar v. Roybal, 963 P.2d 548 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998). “” Additionally, the Department asserts that it derives its authority when Section 27-2-27(D) is read together with Sections 40-11-7 and -23(A). We cannot agree that the Department has standing to bring this petition.”

Urias v. Nieto (N.M. Ct. App. 2018). “Thereafter, Respondent 9 filed a motion to dismiss arguing that Petitioner waived the right to request “back 10 pay” from him because the child had reached the age of majority, and therefore, 11 any action for retroactive child support belonged to “the now adult child.” After 12…”

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.