Statute Annotations › New Mexico › N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10

N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10

Private remedies: the cases that interpreted this section

Jurisdiction
New Mexico
Case notes
13
Cited in passing
12
Citing cases indexed
46
Case dates
1993–2023
Screened through
2025-02-10
Courts' treatment: live
No reviewed case has held this section invalid, preempted, superseded or repealed.
This reflects what the reviewed cases said, not legislative action: a later amendment or repeal by the legislature would not appear here unless a reviewed case discussed it.

25 citing cases reviewed of 46 in the citation index: 13 interpreted the section (annotated below), 12 cited it only in passing. Cases filed after 2025-02-10 may not have been reviewed yet.

Have a situation under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10?

These notes show how courts have ruled. Ask about your specific facts and see which of these rulings apply, with citations you can check.

Attorney fees and costs

Section 57-12-10(C) treats an action as groundless for purposes of a defendant’s fee request when it was frivolous under the facts or law at the time it was brought.

Knight v. Snap-On Tools Corp. · filed 1993-08-31(C)

A claim is groundless under the UTPA if it is frivolous under the facts or law extant at the time it is brought.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(C) entitles a plaintiff who recovers statutory damages for an unfair or deceptive trade practice to attorney fees and costs.

Daye v. Community Financial Loan Service Centers, LLC · filed 2017-11-30(C)

Recovering statutory damages means that Daye is a “party complaining of an unfair or deceptive trade practice” who prevails, so she is entitled to recover “attorney fees and costs.”
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(C) requires an award of fees and costs to a party charged with a UPA violation if the action was groundless; dismissal for failure to state a claim does not alone establish groundlessness.

Raja v. Ohio Sec. Ins. Co. · filed 2018-03-31(C)

Although the Court sees fit to dismiss those UPA allegations for failing to state a claim, the Court sees no sound reason to conclude, however, that these UPA claims were baseless.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(C) entitles a plaintiff who wins a UPA claim to attorney fees even when the recovery is below the federal diversity jurisdictional amount.

Mimaco LLC v. Faurie · filed 2000-07-31(C)

However, § 1332(b) applies to costs, not attorney fees. In addition, § 1332(b) permits, but does not require, a district court to deny costs when a plaintiff’s recovery is less than the jurisdictional amount. ... In this case, plaintiff won a jury verdict on its UPA claim and therefore is entitled to attorney fees under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(C).
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(C) entitles a party who prevails on a UPA claim through a settlement to reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Fallen v. GREP Southwest, LLC · filed 2017-03-30(C)

The Fallens successfully prosecuted their UPA and UORRA claims against GREP Southwest and Camino Real, because GREP Southwest and Camino Real agreed to pay the Fallens $2,000.00 to settle those claims. ... Accordingly, the Fallens, as prevailing parties under the UPA and the UORRA, are “entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs to be assessed by the court.” N.M. Stat. Ann. § 47-8-48(A). See N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(C).
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(C) requires an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to a prevailing claimant.

Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Society v. Manganaro · filed 2003-09-09(C)

In addition, attorneys’ fees and costs “shall [be] award[ed]” to a prevailing claimant. Id. § 57-12-10(C). ... Because the UPA requires the award of attorneys’ fees to a prevailing claimant, the potential award of attorneys’ fees, in addition to compensatory and treble damages, should have been considered in determining whether Woodmen satisfied the jurisdictional amount.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Loss and causation

Section 57-12-10(B) requires a loss caused by an illegal practice, with proof of impact judged as it is under New Mexico antitrust law.

In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation · filed 2006-05-12(B)

New Mexico’s consumer protection statute limits recovery to one “who suffers any loss of money or property, real or personal, as a result of’ an illegal practice. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(B). Although I have found no New Mexico cases on point, I see no reason to judge proof of impact any differently than for antitrust.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Injunctive relief

Section 57-12-10(A) permits injunctive relief without proof of monetary loss.

Padilla v. Am. Modern Home Ins. Co. · filed 2017-09-30(A)

The first remedy under the statute-injunctive relief-expressly is not conditioned upon proof of monetary loss.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Damages

Section 57-12-10(B) allows statutory damages without proof of actual monetary or property loss.

Bhasker v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co. · filed 2019-02-07(B)

UPA plaintiffs do not need to show actual damages, or the actual loss of money or property to recover statutory damages, however.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(B) permits $300 in statutory damages for a willful violation even without actual damages, but treble damages require actual damages.

Woodward v. GEICO Advantage Insurance Company · filed 2022-07-25(B)

The Court does find, however, that Woodward has plausibly alleged an entitlement to “three times actual damages or $300” under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(B). ... Of course, Woodward cannot establish an entitlement to “treble damages” in the absence of actual damages, but he may be entitled to statutory damages of $300 if he otherwise satisfies the statutory standard.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(B) gives the court discretion to award treble damages for a willful Unfair Practices Act violation.

Mohon v. National Congress of Employers Inc. · filed 2021-02-16(B)

Like the TCPA claim, the New Mexico UPA grants a court discretion to treble damages if it finds a willful violation.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(B) allows a claimant to recover actual damages or $100, whichever is greater, and permits increased damages for a willful violation.

Mohon v. Spiller II · filed 2023-10-04(B)

The UPA provides that “[a]ny person who suffers any loss of money or property, real or personal, as a result of any … act or practice declared unlawful by the Unfair Practices Act may bring an action to recover actual damages or the sum of one hundred dollars ($100), whichever is greater.” N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(B). Plaintiff therefore is entitled to $40,000 in statutory damages under the UPA. ... The UPA also allows treble damages “up to three times actual damages or three hundred dollars ($300), whichever is greater, to the party complaining of the practice,” if the court finds that a defendant has “willfully engaged in the [complained of] trade practice.” N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10(B). ... The Court concludes that Plaintiff is entitled to trebled damages.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 57-12-10(B) permits recovery for diminished vehicle value without requiring a defect to manifest.

In re Gen. Motors LLC · filed 2018-09-12(B)

It is true that in ... but nothing in the Court's decision - or any other decision applying New Mexico law - suggests that manifestation is required to recover under the New Mexico UTPA.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
12 more cases cited this section only in passing

These cases mention the section without interpreting it (a string cite, a footnote, background). Listed so you can see the full citation record, not just the annotated rulings.

Miera v. Dairyland Insurance Company, the opinion reports the plaintiff’s fee request while deciding federal amount in controversy; its quote does not decide § 57-12-10(C). opinion →
In re Relafen Antitrust Litigation, the quoted passage concerns a proposed class waiver but does not show the claimed limit to actual damages under § 57-12-10(E). opinion →
Miera v. Dairyland Ins. Co., the court cited the section’s fee provision while deciding the federal amount in controversy; it did not decide a rule of this section. opinion →
Tracker Marine, L.P. v. Ogle, the New Mexico provision appears in a string cite comparing state laws, not in this court’s decision about that section. opinion →
Tracker Marine, L.P. v. Ogle, Ken and Baccus, Randy as Class Representatives, the court cites subsections (B) and (E) in lists comparing state laws, but does not decide either subsection’s rules. opinion →
White v. Wyeth, the court lists § 57-12-10 in a footnote surveying similar statutes; its decision concerns West Virginia law, not this New Mexico section. opinion →
Daye v. Community Financial Service Centers, LLC, the opinion reports Daye’s argument; the opinion does not show the court adopting it or deciding the section’s rule. opinion →
Childress v. Desilva Automotive Services LLC, the court mentions the subsection’s fee-shifting provision in a footnote but decides what the Rule 68 offer includes. opinion →
Dominquez v. Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, the court quoted § 57-12-10(C) but did not decide its requirements or apply them; it denied the fee request without prejudice because of the briefing. opinion →
Escano v. The ADT Security Corporation, the court declined to decide how § 57-12-10 limits damages; it decided only that the amount of relief was inappropriate to resolve on this Rule 12(b)(6) motion. opinion →
Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America v. New Mexico Bone and Joint Institute P.C., this is a magistrate judge’s recommendation that the district judge has not yet adopted. opinion →
Esquibel-Mead v. American General Life Insurance Company, the court cites the section’s potential treble damages and attorneys’ fees when assessing the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction. opinion →

Which of these rulings fit your facts?

Describe your situation under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 57-12-10. Ezel checks it against the cases on this page and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace