New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 66-5-303 (2026)

Uninsured motorist; judicial review [of] arbitration award

✓ current as of May 2026

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

After a party to an arbitration proceeding involving an uninsured motorist receives notice of an award, the party may make a motion to the district court for an order confirming the award, at which time the court shall issue a confirming order unless the award is modified or corrected pursuant to Section 44-7A-21 or 44-7A-25 NMSA 1978 or is vacated pursuant to Section 44-7A-24 NMSA 1978.

History: 1978 Comp., § 66-5-303, enacted by Laws 2003, ch. 427, § 1.

ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For procedures governing administrative appeals to the district court, see Rule 1-074 NMRA.

Repeals and reenactments. — Laws 2003, ch. 427, § 1 repealed 66-5-303 NMSA 1978, as enacted by Laws 1969, ch. 18, § 4, and enacted a new section, effective June 20, 2003.

Unilateral demand not sufficient where policy requires bilateral agreement. — New Mexico law does not require arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim upon the unilateral demand of either the insurer or the insured where the insurance policy states that disputes regarding whether the insured is entitled to receive payment under the policy, or the amount of payment due, will be submitted to arbitration only if both the insurer and insured consent. McMillian v. Allstate Indem. Co., 2004-NMSC-002, 135 N.M. 17, 84 P.3d 65.

Binding arbitration not compelled. — Where the uninsured motorist endorsement provides for arbitration only upon the consent of both parties, and where the superintendent of insurance has approved such an endorsement, New Mexico law does not compel binding arbitration. McMillian v. Allstate Indem. Co., 2004-NMSC-002, 135 N.M. 17, 84 P.3d 65.

Arbitration provision providing for limited de novo appeal substantively unconscionable. — The limited de novo appeal provision in an insurance contract, providing for mandatory arbitration which would be binding on both parties for any award of damages not exceeding the limits of the Mandatory Financial Responsibility Act but providing for de novo appeal by either party of awards over that amount, violates public policy and is void as substantively unconscionable. Padilla v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2003-NMSC-011, 133 N.M. 661, 68 P.3d 901.

Law reviews. — For note, "Uninsured Motorist Arbitration," see 3 N.M.L. Rev. 220 (1973). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Validity and enforceability of provisions for binding arbitration, and waiver thereof, 24 A.L.R.3d 1325.

Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage: enforceability of policy provision limiting appeals from arbitration, 23 A.L.R.5th 801.

PART 5 IDENTIFICATION CARDS

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1979–2003 · leading case: McMillan v. Allstate Indem. Co., 84 P.3d 65 (N.M. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McMillan v. Allstate Indem. Co., 84 P.3d 65 (N.M. 2003). · cites it 19× “They rely upon the current NMSA 1978, § 66-5-303 (2003), conceding that before Section 66-5-303 was repealed and reenacted in 2003, the Legislature did not mandate arbitration as the sole means of resolving UM claims.”

Dairyland Ins. v. Rose, 591 P.2d 281 (N.M. 1979). · cites it 9× “Appellant filed a complaint in district court pursuant to § 66-5-303, N.M.S.A.1978 (formerly § 64-24-107, N.”

Fernandez v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona, 857 P.2d 22 (N.M. 1993). · cites it 2× “This Court resolved the potential conflict between the provisions for judicial review of arbitration awards under the Arbitration Act, see §§ 44-7-12 & -13, and the provision for de novo review of arbitration awards concerning uninsured motorist coverage in automobile liability…”

Allstate Ins. v. Perea, 8 P.3d 166 (N.M. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 8× “{22} Finally, we note that Section 66-5-303 of the Uninsured Motorists’ Insurance statute, enacted in 1969, permits any party aggrieved by an arbitrator’s award to appeal that award to the district court de novo.”

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.