New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 55-1-101 (2026)

Short titles

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(a) Chapter 55 NMSA 1978 shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Commercial Code"; and

(b) Chapter 55, Article 1 NMSA 1978 shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Commercial Code-General Provisions".

History: 1953 Comp., § 50A-1-101, enacted by Laws 1961, ch. 96, § 1-101; 1992, ch. 114, § 1; 2005, ch. 144, § 1.

OFFICIAL COMMENTS

Source. — Former Section 1-101 [55-1-101 NMSA 1978].

Changes from former law. — Subsection (b) is new. It is added in order to make the structure of Article 1 parallel with that of the other articles of the Uniform Commercial Code. 1. Each other article of the Uniform Commercial Code may also be cited by its own short title. See Sections 2-101, 2A-101, 3-101, 4-101, 4A-101, 5-101, 6-101, 7-101, 8- 101, 9-101, 12-101, and 12A-101 [55-2-101, 55-2A-101, 55-3-101, 55-4-101, 55-4A- 101, 55-5-101, 55-6-101, 55-7-101, 55-8-101, 55-9-101, 55-12-101, 55-12A-101 NMSA 1978, respectively].

ANNOTATIONS

The 2005 amendment, effective January 1, 2006, added Subsection (b) to define the "Uniform Commercial Code-General Provisions".

The 1992 amendment, effective July 1, 1992, substituted "Chapter 55 NMSA 1978" for "This act" and inserted "the".

Purpose of comments is to explain provisions of the code itself, in effect to promote uniformity of interpretation. Burchett v. Allied Concord Fin. Corp., 1964-NMSC-231, 74 N.M. 575, 396 P.2d 186.

Comments deemed persuasive. — Official comments appearing as part of the Uniform Commercial Code are not direct authority for construction to be placed upon a section of the code, nevertheless they are persuasive and represent the opinion of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and the American Law Institute. Burchett v. Allied Concord Fin. Corp., 1964-NMSC-231, 74 N.M. 575, 396 P.2d 186.

The court recognizes official comments to the code as persuasive, but not controlling, authority. First State Bank v. Clark, 1977-NMSC-088, 91 N.M. 117, 570 P.2d 1144.

Law reviews. — For article, "New Mexico's Uniform Commercial Code: Who Is the Beneficiary of the Stop Payment Provisions of Article 4?" see 4 Nat. Resources J. 69 (1964).

For article, "Special Property Under the Uniform Commercial Code: A New Concept in Sales," see 4 Nat. Resources J. 98 (1964).

For article, "Fixtures and the Uniform Commercial Code in New Mexico," see 4 Nat. Resources J. 109 (1964).

Graham v. Stoneham, 73 N.M. 382, 388 P.2d 389 (1963), commented on in 4 Nat. Resources J. 175 (1964).

For note, "New Mexico's Uniform Commercial Code: Presentment Warranties and the Myth of the 'Shelter Provision' " see 4 Nat. Resources J. 398 (1964).

For comment, "Assignments - Maker's Defenses Cut Off - Uniform Commercial Code § 9-206," see 5 Nat. Resources J. 408 (1965). For article, "The Warehouseman vs. the Secured Party: Who Prevails When the Warehouseman's Lien Covers Goods Subject to a Security Interest?" see 8 Nat. Resources J. 331 (1968).

Loucks v. Albuquerque Nat'l Bank, 76 N.M. 735, 418 P.2d 191 (1966), commented on in 8 Nat. Resources J. 169 (1968).

For comment, "Commercial Law - Uniform Commercial Code - Sale of Goods," see 8 Nat. Resources J. 176 (1968).

For note, "Fixtures, Security Interests and Filing: Problems of Title Examination in New Mexico," see 8 Nat. Resources J. 513 (1968).

Strevell-Paterson Fin. Co. v. May, 77 N.M. 331, 422 P.2d 366 (1967), commented on in 8 Nat. Resources J. 713 (1968).

For comment, "The Miller Act in New Mexico - Materialman's Right to Recover on Prime's Surety Bond in Public Works Contracts - Notice as Condition Precedent to Action," see 9 Nat. Resources J. 295 (1969).

For comment, "New Mexico's Uniform Commercial Code in Oil and Gas Transactions," see 10 Nat. Resources J. 361 (1970).

For article, "Survey of New Mexico Law, 1982-83: Commercial Law," see 14 N.M.L. Rev. 45 (1984).

For article, "Lender Recourse in Indian Country: A Navajo Case Study," see 21 N.M.L. Rev. 275 (1991).

For survey of 1990-91 commercial law, see 22 N.M.L. Rev. 661 (1992).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 11 Am. Jur. 2d Bills and Notes § 42; 67 Am. Jur. 2d Sales § 1 et seq.; 68A Am. Jur. 2d Secured Transactions § 163 et seq.

Excessiveness or inadequacy of attorney's fees in matters involving commercial and general business activities, 23 A.L.R.5th 241.

82 C.J.S. Statutes § 221.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 25 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Resolution Trust Corp. v. Binford, 844 P.2d 810 (N.M. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Binford, 844 P.2d 810 (N.M. 1992). · cites it 4× “In this regard, the parties agree that because this case was instituted before the effective date of the amendment, the amendment is not applicable to their rights and remedies. Binford and Fritz argue that, rather than pursuing this action as a foreclosure on real estate, RTC…”

Fiser v. Dell Comput. Corp., 188 P.3d 1215 (N.M. 2008). “He alleges violations of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act (UPA), NMSA 1978, Sections 57-12-1 to -26 (1967, as amended through 2003), the New Mexico False Advertising Act, NMSA 1978, Sections 57-15-1 to -10 (1965), the New Mexico Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), NMSA 1978,…”

Salazar v. D.W.B.H., Inc., 192 P.3d 1205 (N.M. 2008). · cites it 2× “BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY {8} Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), NMSA 1978, §§ 55-1-101 through 55-2A-532 (1961, as amended through 2005), an express warranty can be created in one of three ways: (1) “any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer…”

Huntington Nat'l Bank v. Sproul, 861 P.2d 935 (N.M. 1993). “1 To support her argument, Mrs. Sproul asserts that the parties to a contract may select the law to govern the performance and enforcement of a contract between them and that this Court will give effect to the parties’ choice-of-law provision in a contract controlled by New…”

Chischilly v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 629 P.2d 340 (N.M. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Sections 55-1-101 et. seq., N.M.S.A. 1978.”

Elephant Butte Resort Marina, Inc. v. Wooldridge, 694 P.2d 1351 (N.M. 1985). “Wooldridge admitted in the pleadings the existence of the contract but raised affirmative defenses. The contract meets the requirements of an enforceable contract for the sale of goods over $500, in that (1) there is a writing which includes a quantity term, and (2)the contract…”

Badilla v. Wal-Mart Stores East Inc., 2015 NMSC 029 (N.M. 2015). · cites it 4× “NMSA 1978, §§ 55-1-101 to 4 55-12-111 (1961, as amended through 2013).”

Oda Nursery, Inc. v. Garcia Tree & Lawn, Inc., 708 P.2d 1039 (N.M. 1985). · cites it 2× “The agreement between Oda and Garcia qualifies as a “contract” (NMSA 1978, § 55-1-201) for the sale of “goods” (NMSA 1978, § 55-2-105), and as such is governed by the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code (NMSA 1978, §§ 55-1-101 to 55-9-507). Even assuming that Oda breached…”

Deaton, Inc. v. Aeroglide Corp., 657 P.2d 109 (N.M. 1982). “This case presents several questions under the Uniform Commercial Code, Sections 55-1-101 to 55-9-507, N.M.S.A.1978 (Cum.”

O'BRIEN v. Chandler, 765 P.2d 1165 (N.M. 1988). “), NMSA 1978, Sections 55-1-101 to 55-9-507. We affirm.”

Davidson Oil Co. v. City of Albuquerque, 108 F.4th 1226 (10th Cir. 2024). “2015) (citing N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 55-1-101 to 55-12-111 (West 1961, as amended through 2013)).”

Gardner Zemke Co. v. Dunham Bush, Inc., 850 P.2d 319 (N.M. 1993). “In the course of our discussion, we will also refer to pertinent general definitions and principles of construction found in NMSA 1978, Sections 55-1-101 to -1-209 (Orig.Pamp. & Cum.”

Show all 25 citing cases →

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.