New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 61-2-2 (2026)

Definitions.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in the Optometry Act:

   A. "practice of optometry" means:

       (1)    the employment of any subjective or objective means or methods,
including but not limited to the use of lenses, prisms, autorefractors or other automated
testing devices, and includes the prescription or administration of drugs for the purpose
of diagnosing the visual defects or abnormal conditions of the human eye and its
adnexa;
       (2)     the employing, adapting or prescribing of preventive or corrective
measures, including but not limited to lenses, prisms, contact or corneal lenses or other
optical appliances, ocular exercises, vision therapy, vision training and vision
rehabilitation services, and includes the prescription or administration of all drugs
rational for the correction, relief or referral of visual defects or abnormal conditions of
the human eye and its adnexa; and

      (3)   does not include the use of surgery or injections in the treatment of eye
diseases except for the use of the following types of in-office minor surgical procedures:

          (a) non-laser removal, destruction or drainage of superficial eyelid lesions and
conjunctival cysts;

                (b) removal of nonperforating foreign bodies from the cornea, conjunctiva and
eyelid;

           (c) non-laser corneal debridement, culture, scrape or anterior puncture, not
including removal of pterygium, corneal biopsy or removal of corneal neoplasias;

                (d) removal of eyelashes; and

           (e) probing, dilation, irrigation or closure of the tear drainage structures of the
eyelid; scalpel use is to be applied only for the purpose of use on the skin surrounding
the eye;

   B. "ophthalmic lens" means a lens that has a spherical, cylindrical or prismatic
value, is ground pursuant to a prescription and is intended to be used as eyeglasses;

   C. "contact lens" means a lens to be worn on the anterior segment of the human
eye;

    D. "prescription" means a written order by an optometrist or a physician for an
individual patient for:

          (1)      ophthalmic lenses;

          (2)      contact lenses; or

      (3)    a pharmaceutical agent that is regulated pursuant to the New Mexico
Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act [Chapter 26, Article 1 NMSA 1978];

   E. "eyeglasses" means an exterior optical device using ophthalmic lenses for the
correction or relief of disturbances in and anomalies of human vision; and

   F. "board" means the board of optometry.
History: 1953 Comp., § 67-1-2, enacted by Laws 1973, ch. 353, § 2; 1977, ch. 30, § 1;
1979, ch. 3, § 1; 1985, ch. 241, § 2; 1995, ch. 20, § 2; 2003, ch. 274, § 1; 2007, ch. 277,
§ 1; 2015, ch. 131, § 1.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

The 2015 amendment, effective June 19, 2015, amended the definition of prescription
in the definitions section of the Optometry Act; and in Paragraph (3) of Subsection D,
after "a", deleted "topical ocular pharmaceutical agent or an oral".

The 2007 amendment, effective April 2, 2007, added Paragraph (3) of Subsection A.

The 2003 amendment, effective June 20, 2003, rewrote this section to the extent that a
detailed comparison is impracticable.

The 1995 amendment, effective July 1, 1995, in Paragraph A(2), inserted "preventive
or corrective measures, including" and "and oral pharmaceutical agents as authorized in
Section 61-2-10.2 NMSA 1978" in the first sentence, deleted "or any controlled
substances" after "injections" and added the proviso at the end of the second sentence;
inserted "or for an oral pharmaceutical agent as authorized in Section 61-2-10.2 NMSA
1978" and "Device" in the introductory paragraph of Subsection D; and made stylistic
changes throughout the section.

"Optometry". — Optometry and the practice of optometry relate basically to the testing
of the loss of eyesight and the correction thereof by the use of optical appliances or
other means, not including drugs, medicines or surgery. 1958 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 58-
158.

Duplicating of lens as "practice of optometry". — A person who duplicates an
ophthalmic lens without a prescription is practicing optometry and as such must be
licensed under the act or is in violation of the same. 1954 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 54-5909.

Contact lenses. — Even though not specifically named in former Optometry Practice
Act, contact lenses could be considered a lens or other optical appliance. 1958 Op. Att'y
Gen. No. 58-158.

Audiometric testing should not be undertaken by optometrist because the various
healing arts professions should stay within the confines of their individual professions as
defined by the separate licensing acts enacted by the state legislature. 1958 Op. Att'y
Gen. No. 58-158.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 61 Am. Jur. 2d Physicians, Surgeons
and Other Healers §§ 8, 39, 40.

70 C.J.S. Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Health-Care Providers §§ 3 to 5.
61-2-3. Criminal offender's character evaluation.
   The provisions of the Criminal Offender Employment Act [28-2-1 to 28-2-6 NMSA
1978] shall govern any consideration of criminal records required or permitted by the
Optometry Act.

History: 1953 Comp., § 67-1-2.1, enacted by Laws 1974, ch. 78, § 11.

                                    ANNOTATIONS

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 70 C.J.S. Physicians, Surgeons, and
Other Health-Care Providers § 19.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1963–1977 · leading case: Branch v. Mays, 554 P.2d 1297 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976).
Branch v. Mays, 554 P.2d 1297 (N.M. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 6× “Sections 61-2-2 and 61-2-6, N.M.S.A. 1953 (2d Repl.”
George M. Morris Constr. Co. v. Four Seasons Motor Inn, Inc., 567 P.2d 965 (N.M. 1977). · cites it 2× “Section 61-2-2, N.M. S.A.1953 (2d Repl.Vol.”
Panhandle Pipe & Steel, Inc. v. Jesko, 457 P.2d 705 (N.M. 1969). · cites it 2× “In addition to the above, it would seem that Jesko’s payment to Edwards for the pipe would be some proof of delivery and use, although appellant does not so contend.”
Allsop Lumber Co. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 385 P.2d 625 (N.M. 1963). “” We see a significant difference between the bond language quoted and the language of § 61-2-2, N.M.S.A.1953. We have no difficulty in concluding that substantial proof is present that the materials were “furnished in the prosecution of the work” so as to create liability under…”
Lembke Constr. Co. v. JD Coggins Co., 382 P.2d 983 (N.M. 1963). “The particular statute involved in this appeal is § 61-2-2, N.M.S.A.1953, the pertinent provisions of which are: “Every person performing labor upon, or furnishing materials to be used in the construction, alteration or repair of any mining claim, building, wharf, bridge, ditch,…”
Ronald A. Coco, Inc. v. St. Paul's Methodist Church, 428 P.2d 636 (N.M. 1967). “Borrett, the contractor, who under the statute (§ 61-2-2, N.M.S.A. 1953) is- made agent of the owner, ordered the beams- from Wood Products, who in turn purchased them from Coco.”
Boone v. Smith, 447 P.2d 23 (N.M. 1968). “ructed upon any lands with the knowledge of the owner or the person having or claiming any interest therein, shall be held to have been constructed at the instance of such owner or person having or claiming any interest therein, and the interest owned or claimed shall be subject…”
Blueher Lumber Co. v. Springer, 423 P.2d 878 (N.M. 1967). “The claim is based on invoices which are in evidence as plaintiff’s exhibits 2 through 9.”
Crego Block Co. v. D. H. Overmyer Co., 458 P.2d 793 (N.M. 1969). “Haddock, supra, are whether the plaintiff is the owner of the right sought to be enforced, and whether he could release and discharge the defendant from the liability upon which the action is grounded. Crego, as plaintiff, meets these tests, without the addition of the…”
Butt v. Vermejo Park Corp., 556 P.2d 835 (N.M. 1976). · cites it 2× “The first issue to be resolved is whether Butt Bros, acquired an enforceable lien against the fee owned by Vermejo under the Mechanics’ Act and particularly under §§ 61-2-2 and 10 thereof, for the labor and materials furnished pursuant to their contract of February 18, 1974 with…”
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.