N.M. Stat. » Chapter 56 — Commercial Instruments and Transactions
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 56-7-3 (2026)

Commercial instruments and transaction

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. A provision of a lease or rental contract for equipment that requires a party to the agreement to indemnify, hold harmless, insure or defend the other party to the agreement, including the other party's officers, employees or agents against liability, claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of bodily injury to a person or damage to property caused by or resulting from, in whole or in part, the negligence, act or omission of the indemnitee, its officers, employees or agents, is void, unenforceable and against the public policy of this state.

B. A lease or rental contract for equipment may contain a provision that requires one party to the contract to indemnify, hold harmless or insure the other party to the contract, including its officers, employees or agents, against liability, claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, only to the extent that the liability, damages, losses or expenses are caused by, or arise out of, the acts or omissions of the indemnitor or its officers, employees or agents.

C. A lease or rental contract for equipment that does not contain a provision covered by this section shall be presumed to conform to Subsections A and B of this section.

D. As used in this section, "lease or rental contract for equipment" means any public, private, foreign or domestic contract or agreement relating to the temporary use of equipment without transfer of ownership of the equipment from one party to the other.

E. As used in this section, "indemnify" or "hold harmless" includes any requirement to name the indemnified party as an additional insured in the indemnitor's insurance coverage for the purpose of providing indemnification for any liability not otherwise allowed in this section. The provisions of this subsection shall not restrict the right of any remedy available to a claimant or plaintiff. F. Nothing in this section shall apply to a lease or rental contract for a motor vehicle, as "motor vehicle" is defined in Section 66-1-4.11 NMSA 1978 and that is designed and used primarily to transport persons or property on a public highway.

G. Nothing in this section shall apply to a security agreement as defined in Section 55-9-102 NMSA 1978 or to a finance lease as defined in Section 55-2A-103 NMSA 1978 or to a lease by a repossessing lessor for equipment repossessed upon default under such a finance lease.

H. Nothing in this section shall apply to a lease or rental contract for equipment for use in the production of motion pictures or television.

History: Laws 2007, ch. 252, § 2.

ANNOTATIONS

Effective dates. — Laws 2007, ch. 252 contained no effective date provision, but, pursuant to N.M. Const., art. IV, § 23, was effective June 15, 2007, 90 days after the adjournment of the legislature.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2009–2010 · leading case: United Rentals Nw., Inc. v. Yearout Mech., Inc., 2010-NMSC-030, 237 P.3d 728.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Rentals Nw., Inc. v. Yearout Mech., Inc., 2010-NMSC-030, 237 P.3d 728. · cites it 4× “NMSA 1978, § 56-7-3 (2007). F. Cases and Statutes in Other Jurisdictions {33} Although it is not critical to our decision, we note that many other jurisdictions have interpreted analogous statutes to encompass indemnity clauses in construction equipment rental agreements.”
United Rentals Nw., Inc. v. Yearout Mech., Inc., 573 F.3d 997 (10th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “Second, United Rentals states that, in 2007, over a *1001 year after the Yearout/United Rentals contract was executed, the New Mexico legislature enacted an anti-indemnification statute specifically concerning the enforceability of indemnification agreements in equipment leases,…”
United Rentals Nw., Inc. v. Yearout Mech., Inc., 384 F. App'x 719 (10th Cir. 2010). “Second, United Rentals states that the New Mexico legislature enacted an anti-indemnification statute specifically concerning the enforceability of indemnification agreements in equipment leases, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 56-7-3 , and argues that it would have been unnecessary to pass §…”
N.M. Stat. § 56-7-3(A): 1 case
United Rentals Nw., Inc. v. Yearout Mech., Inc., 2010-NMSC-030, 237 P.3d 728. “NMSA 1978, § 56-7-3 (2007). F. Cases and Statutes in Other Jurisdictions {33} Although it is not critical to our decision, we note that many other jurisdictions have interpreted analogous statutes to encompass indemnity clauses in construction equipment rental agreements.”
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.