New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 40-2-1 (2026)

[Mutual obligations of husband and wife.]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Husband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity
and support.

History: Laws 1907, ch. 37, § 1; Code 1915, § 2744; C.S. 1929, § 68-101; 1941 Comp.,
§ 65-201; 1953 Comp., § 57-2-1.

                                    ANNOTATIONS
Cross references. — For dissolution of marriage, see 40-4-1 to 40-4-20 NMSA 1978.

For Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, see 40-6A-100 NMSA 1978.

As a general rule, spouses are permitted to sue each other for intentional torts.
Papatheofanis v. Allen, 2010-NMCA-036, 148 N.M. 791, 242 P.3d 358, cert. quashed,
2010-NMCERT-011, 150 N.M. 490, 262 P.3d 1143.

Claims for intentional torts between spouses. — Where, during the marriage of
plaintiff and defendant, defendant induced plaintiff to convey a one-half interest in the
family home, which was plaintiff’s solely owned property, to defendant by representing
to plaintiff that if plaintiff died, the parties’ child would not have an interest in the home;
defendant falsely commenced a domestic violence claim against plaintiff; defendant
falsely reported to plaintiff’s employer that plaintiff was misusing government property at
plaintiff’s workplace; without the knowledge or permission of plaintiff, defendant opened
credit card accounts by forging plaintiff’s name on application forms, leased a vehicle
using plaintiff’s information, and registered a patent in defendant’s name using plaintiff’s
intellectual property; and defendant was an attorney and a mortgage loan officer, the
jury verdict in plaintiff’s action against defendant finding defendant liable for fraud,
breach of fiduciary duty, malicious abuse of process, and defamation was supported by
substantial evidence. Papatheofanis v. Allen, 2010-NMCA-036, 148 N.M. 791, 242 P.3d
358, cert. quashed, 2010-NMCERT-011, 150 N.M. 490, 262 P.3d 1143

Abatement of alimony is properly granted where it is shown that a wife has procured
a divorce on cross-complaint in her husband's suit for divorce; that she had received
$22,500 in a property settlement and an award of $60.00 per month alimony; that she
had no children, but was the sole support of her mother; that she had remarried but was
suing to have the second marriage annulled on the ground of fraud. Mindlin v. Mindlin,
1937-NMSC-012, 41 N.M. 155, 66 P.2d 260.

Alimony accruing subsequent to remarriage. — Where divorced wife admitted her
remarriage and no proof of such exceptional circumstances as would justify a
continuance of the husband's duty to support his ex-wife subsequent to her remarriage,
it appeared trial court erred in awarding wife alimony accruing subsequent to her
remarriage. Kuert v. Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded
by statute, Galassi v. Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Alimony after remarriage not good public policy unless exceptional
circumstances. — When the wife contracts a subsequent marriage with another, thus
creating a duty of support in him, good public policy does not demand that she continue
to receive support from her first husband unless she prove exceptional circumstances.
Kuert v. Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded by statute,
Galassi v. Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Proof of remarriage establishes case for alimony modification. — Proof of his
former wife's remarriage establishes the divorced husband's prima facie case for
modification of alimony payments coming due subsequent to such remarriage. Kuert v.
Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded by statute, Galassi v.
Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Wife's mother entitled to recover from husband for necessities. — In the case of a
wife whose husband neglected and abandoned her when she was sick in bed and
without provisions, and her mother took her home and provided her with the necessities
of life, including nursing and medical care, the mother was entitled to recover of the
husband the cost of such necessities. Nicholas v. Bickford, 1940-NMSC-018, 44 N.M.
210, 100 P.2d 906 (decided under former law).

When husband fails to provide necessities. — In suit by a mother against her
daughter's husband for necessaries furnished the daughter by the mother, it must
appear that the husband had failed to provide the necessaries, including medical care.
Nicholas v. Bickford, 1940-NMSC-018, 44 N.M. 210, 100 P.2d 906 (decided under
former law).

Father entitled to recovery for support furnished wife. — In action for divorce the
wife is not entitled to recovery for support furnished her by her father as cause of action
for such support, if any, is vested in the father. Harper v. Harper, 1950-NMSC-024, 54
N.M. 194, 217 P.2d 857 (decided under former law).

Husband's liability for medical services. — A husband is not liable for medical
services rendered his wife upon her individual written promise to pay therefor, it not
being shown that he had neglected to furnish or provide for adequate service of the
kind. Chevallier v. Connors, 1927-NMSC-084, 33 N.M. 93, 262 P. 173 (decided under
former law).

Removal of wife from county to defeat recovery on note. — Agreement by husband
to remove his wife from the county of their domicile, and to keep her out of the county,
was not such an illegal contract as could be availed of by the maker of a promissory
note to defeat recovery thereon. Dominguez v. Rocas, 1929-NMSC-072, 34 N.M. 317,
281 P. 25 (decided under former law).

Duty of support is owed from husband to wife at common law and under this
section. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-151.

Remarriage of wife relieves former husband of the duty of support of the ex-wife as
of her remarriage. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-151.

Law reviews. — For symposium, "The Effects of an Equal Rights Amendment on the
New Mexico System of Community Property: Problems of Characterization,
Management and Control," see 3 N.M.L. Rev. 11 (1973).

For symposium, "Equal Rights in Divorce and Separation," see 3 N.M.L. Rev. 118
(1973).
For article, "The Community Property Act of 1973: A Commentary and Quasi-Legislative
History," see 5 N.M.L. Rev. 1 (1974).

For article, "Arbitration of Domestic Relations Disputes in New Mexico," see 16 N.M.L.
Rev. 321 (1986).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 73 Am. Jur. 2d Support of Persons §§
21, 22.

Rights and remedies in respect of property accumulated by man and woman living
together in illicit relations or under void marriage, 31 A.L.R.2d 1255.

Marriage as extinguishing contractual indebtedness between parties, 45 A.L.R.2d 722.

Husband's liability to third person for necessaries furnished wife separated from him, 60
A.L.R.2d 7.

Wife's liability for necessaries furnished husband, 11 A.L.R.4th 1160.

Necessity, in action against husband for necessaries furnished wife, or proving
husband's failure to provide necessities, 19 A.L.R.4th 432.

Modern status of rule that husband is primarily or solely liable for necessaries furnished
wife, 20 A.L.R.4th 196.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: State v. Santillanes, 27 P.3d 456 (N.M. 2001).
State v. Santillanes, 27 P.3d 456 (N.M. 2001). · cites it 4× “108, §§ 1, 2 (codified as NMSA 1953, § 40-2-1, -2). A comparison of these statutes indicates that the 1953 New Mexico Legislature would have considered Defendant's actions to be vehicular homicide.”
Griego v. Oliver, 2014 NMSC 003 (N.M. 2013). · cites it 3× “” Section 40-2-1. Other provisions in Article 2 describe in general terms marriage settlements or separation contracts, requiring that any such agreements be in writing.”
Church v. Church, 630 P.2d 1243 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “Section 40-2-1, N.M.S.A.1978. An issue is whether, in Virginia, a wife has a duty to support her husband.”
State v. Parvilus, 2013 NMCA 25 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “, NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (1907) (stating that “[h]usband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and support”); NMSA 1978, § 40-2-2 (1907) (explaining contract rights of husband and wife); NMSA 1978, §§ 40-2-4 to -7 (1907, as amended through…”
State v. Parvilus, 2014 NMSC 028 (N.M. 2014). · cites it 2× “, NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (1907) (stating that “[h]usband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and support”); NMSA 1978, § 40-2-2 (1907) (specifying the rights of husband and wife to contract mutually or the right of either to contract with…”
Employers Nat'l Ins. v. Winters ex rel. Harcrow, 681 P.2d 741 (N.M. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “See NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (Repl.Pamp.1983). However, as set forth by the legislature in the statutory scheme it adopted in Section 52-1-46 for the distribution of death benefits to the worker’s survivors, the surviving spouse and children of the deceased worker are of the same…”
Butterworth v. Jackson (N.M. 2026). · cites it 8× “However, because the parties 13 failed to brief arguments on this Court overturning its own precedent, whether any 14 decision to do so should apply retroactively or prospectively, and the impact of 15 NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (1907) (“Mutual obligations” section under Chapter 40, 16…”
Griego v. Oliver, 2014 NMSC 3 (N.M. 2013). · cites it 3× “Finally, the provisions in NMSA 1978, Chapter 40, Article 2 (1901, as amended through 1973) that define the rights of married persons generally refer to “husband and wife”3; the provisions in NMSA 1978, Chapter 40, Article 3 (1907, as amended through 1997) address the property…”
State v. Parvilus, 2014 NMSC 28 (N.M. 2014). · cites it 2× “, NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (1907) (stating that “[h]usband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and support”); NMSA 1978, § 40-2-2 (1907) (specifying the rights of husband and wife to contract mutually or the right of either to contract with…”
State v. Parvilus, 2013 NMCA 025 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “, NMSA 1978, § 40-2-1 (1907) (stating that “[hjusband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and support”); NMSA 1978, § 40-2-2 (1907) (explaining contract rights of husband and wife); NMSA 1978, §§ 40-2-4 to -7 (1907, as amended through…”
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.