A person finding estray sheep or goats shall immediately report them to an inspector
or the director and deliver them to an inspector upon demand. If the mark or brand on
the sheep or goat is recorded in the board office, the director shall notify the owner of
record and make arrangements to deliver the sheep or goats to the owner of record if
he is the actual owner. If the owner of record no longer owns the sheep or goats, the
director shall deliver them to the subsequent purchaser who can prove ownership with a
valid bill of sale. In either case, delivery shall be conditioned upon payment by the
claimant of all costs incurred in keeping the sheep or goats and such other expenses as
may have been necessarily incurred. If the owner cannot be ascertained after diligent
inquiry, the director shall order an inspector to sell them to the person paying the
highest cash price for them after giving general or special notice or advertising as the
director deems necessary under the circumstances. The money arising from the sale
shall be used first to defray the costs and expenses in keeping and advertising the
sheep or goats and those incurred in the sale. The residue, if any, shall be placed in the
board fund; provided, however, that if at any time within two years after the sale any
person shall prove ownership of the sheep or goats at the time they became lost, the
residue shall be paid to him.
History: 1941 Comp., § 49-889, enacted by Laws 1951, ch. 188, § 28; 1953 Comp., §
47-8-28; Laws 1999, ch. 282, § 42.
ANNOTATIONS
The 1999 amendment, effective July 1, 1999, inserted "or goats" and substituted
"director" for "secretary" throughout the section, and substituted "two years" for "one (1)
year" in the last sentence.
Notes of Decisions
Bd. of Educ. of Carlsbad v. Harrell, 882 P.2d 511 (N.M. 1994).
“1 (1968), §§ 77-8-16 and -17. Relief for wrongful discharge under the current statute contemplates reinstatement and back pay, as did the statute in Jones.”
Brininstool v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 466 P.2d 885 (N.M. Ct. App. 1970).
· cites it 2× “Unquestionably, the State Board has authority to prescribe regulations for the conduct of hearings before local boards. Sections 77-8-12, 14 and 16, N.M.S.A.”
Bertrand v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 544 P.2d 1176 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975).
· cites it 2× “The jurisdiction of the State Board is limited to review of decisions of the local school board made after an informal hearing conducted pursuant to § 77-8-16, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl.Vol. 11, pt.”
Quintana v. State Bd. of Educ., 472 P.2d 385 (N.M. Ct. App. 1970).
“It is to hear appeals from decisions “ * * * of a local school board after a hearing conducted pursuant to * * * ” § 77-8-16, supra. No such hearing was held.”
Riddle v. Bd. of Educ., 435 P.2d 1013 (N.M. Ct. App. 1967).
“, provides that a party aggrieved by a decision of the State Board may appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals.”
Shepard v. Bd. of Educ. of the Jemez Springs Mun. Schs., 470 P.2d 306 (N.M. 1970).
“1953, as to what date was the last day of the school year, from which determination appeal can be taken to the State Board of Education and to the Court of Appeals under §§ 77-8-16 and 77-8-17, N.M.S.A.1953. The proceeding is one in the administrative field and appellee…”
McAlister v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 487 P.2d 159 (N.M. Ct. App. 1971).
“See § 77-8-16(C), supra. With this record we cannot say that McAlister’s right to a fair hearing, or his interests, was substantially prejudiced by the admission of the four exhibits.”
N.M. Stat. § 77-8-16(C): 1 case
McAlister v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 487 P.2d 159 (N.M. Ct. App. 1971).
“See § 77-8-16(C), supra. With this record we cannot say that McAlister’s right to a fair hearing, or his interests, was substantially prejudiced by the admission of the four exhibits.”
N.M. Stat. § 77-8-16(E): 1 case
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.