Sections 66-3-1001 through 66-3-1016 [and 66-3-1017 to 66-3-1020] NMSA 1978
may be cited as the "Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act".
History: 1953 Comp., § 64-3-1001, enacted by Laws 1978, ch. 35, § 197; 1985, ch.
189, § 1.
ANNOTATIONS
Compiler's notes. — Laws 2005, ch. 325, §§ 19 to 22 were enacted as new sections of
the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act. They were compiled as 66-3-1017 to 66-3-1020
NMSA 1978 by the compiler. The bracketed material in § 66-3-1001 NMSA 1978 was
added by the compiler and is not part of the law.
Cross references. — For restrictions on vehicle use damaging to wildlife reproduction,
management or habitat, see 17-6-3 to 17-6-6 NMSA 1978.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Products liability: All-Terrain vehicles
(ATV's), 83 A.L.R.4th 70.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2022 · leading case:
State v. Natoni, 2012-NMCA-062.
State v. Natoni, 2012-NMCA-062.
· cites it 2× “The parties agreed that the ATV constituted an off-highway motor vehicle and that Defendant violated the OHMVA, NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 through -1020 (1978, as amended through 2009).”
State v. Bernard, 2015-NMCA-089, 8 N.M. Ct. App. 440.
“Off-highway motor vehicles, such as snowmobiles and side-by-side ATVs, 8 are also subject to registration requirements under the Motor Vehicle Code’s 9 provisions, including the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act (OHMVA), NMSA 1978, 10 §§ 66-3-1001 to -1020 (1978, as amended through…”
Rivero v. Lovington Country Club, Inc., 1997-NMCA-114, 949 P.2d 287.
· cites it 2× “Defendant moved for summary judgment, claiming that it had immunity under the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 to -1016 (1985). Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the basis that the road on which the accident occurred had become a public road by…”
State v. Natoni, 2012-NMCA-062, 2 N.M. 75.
· cites it 2× “The parties agreed that the ATV constituted an off-highway motor vehicle and that Defendant violated the OHMVA,NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 through -1020 (1978, as amended through 2009).”
Castillo v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (N.M. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “16 {2} Upon review of application of the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act 17 (OHMVA), NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 to -1021 (1975, as amended through 2017) 18 to the circumstances of this case, this Court holds that Castillo’s RZR is not subject 19 to the MFRA because it is an…”
Castillo v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., No. A-1-CA-39107 (N.M. Ct. App. Oct. 25, 2022).
· cites it 2× “{2} Upon review of application of the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act (OHMVA), NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 to -1021 (1975, as amended through 2017) to the circumstances of this case, this Court holds that Castillo’s RZR is not subject to the MFRA because it is an off-highway motor…”
State v. Cale, No. 30,006 (N.M. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2011).
· cites it 2× “Defendant further 18 claimed that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by improperly charging her with 19 violating Section 66-8-102(A) instead of the more specific misdemeanor offense 3 1 found in the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 66-3-1001 to -1020 2 (1978, as…”
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.