Motorcycle Accident Complaint - New Mexico

MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT COMPLAINT — NEW MEXICO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
3. General Factual Allegations
4. Count I — Negligence (Against Defendant Driver)
5. Count II — Negligence Per Se (Against Defendant Driver)
6. Count III — Respondeat Superior / Negligent Entrustment (Against Defendant Owner)
7. Damages
8. Comparative Fault, Helmet, and Insurance Allegations
9. Prayer for Relief
10. Jury Demand
11. Reservation of Rights
12. Signature Block
13. Verification
14. Certificate of Service
15. New Mexico Practice Notes
16. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE [JUDICIAL DISTRICT] JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF [COUNTY], STATE OF NEW MEXICO

No. D-[________]-CV-[YYYY]-[________]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (MOTORCYCLE COLLISION); JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, complaining of the Defendants, alleges as follows:

2. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is a natural person residing at [ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, New Mexico, and at all material times was lawfully operating a motorcycle upon the public roadways of this State.

2. Defendant [DRIVER NAME] ("Driver Defendant") is, upon information and belief, a resident of [COUNTY / STATE] and may be served with process at [SERVICE ADDRESS].

3. Defendant [OWNER / EMPLOYER NAME] ("Owner Defendant") is [an individual / a corporation / an LLC] that, at all material times, owned, controlled, maintained, and/or furnished the vehicle operated by Driver Defendant and/or employed Driver Defendant, and may be served at [SERVICE ADDRESS / REGISTERED AGENT].

4. This action arises under New Mexico tort law for personal injuries and property damage sustained in a motor-vehicle collision occurring in [COUNTY] County, New Mexico, on [__/__/____].

5. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under N.M. Const. art. VI, § 13 because [FACTS SHOWING THE MATTER IS WITHIN THE DISTRICT COURT'S ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AND NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY EXCEPTED].

6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over each Defendant under [CURRENT BASIS]. If relying on NMSA 1978, § 38-1-16, identify the enumerated New Mexico act and facts showing that each asserted claim arises from that act.

7. Venue is proper in this Court under NMSA 1978, § 38-3-1 [SELECT SUBSECTION] because [FACTS SATISFYING THE SELECTED STATUTORY ROUTE].

8. Under Rule 1-008(A)(3) NMRA, Plaintiff does not allege a specific monetary amount because that allegation is not necessary to this Complaint.

3. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

9. On [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was lawfully operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] motorcycle traveling [northbound / southbound / etc.] on [ROADWAY] at or near its intersection with [CROSS STREET / LANDMARK / MILE MARKER], in [CITY], New Mexico (the "Collision").

10. At the same time and place, Driver Defendant was operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] [passenger vehicle / pickup truck / SUV / commercial vehicle] owned by Owner Defendant.

11. Traffic, lighting, and weather conditions were [describe — e.g., clear, dry, daylight], and Plaintiff's motorcycle headlamp was illuminated and operating.

12. The Collision occurred when Driver Defendant [SELECT / DESCRIBE THE MANNER OF COLLISION — e.g., turned left across Plaintiff's path of travel; failed to yield the right-of-way at the intersection; changed lanes into the lane occupied by Plaintiff's motorcycle; followed Plaintiff's motorcycle too closely and struck it from the rear; pulled out from a private drive or side street into Plaintiff's path].

13. Although Plaintiff's motorcycle was plainly visible, Driver Defendant "looked but failed to see" Plaintiff's approaching motorcycle, misjudged its speed and distance, and/or failed to keep a proper lookout for motorcycles lawfully sharing the roadway.

14. Plaintiff had the right-of-way and was operating the motorcycle in a lawful, prudent, and careful manner at all material times.

15. As a direct and proximate result of the Collision, Plaintiff was thrown from the motorcycle and sustained severe, painful, and permanent bodily injuries, including but not limited to [LIST INJURIES — e.g., orthopedic fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal injury, internal injuries, road rash / degloving, and disfiguring scarring].

16. Because a motorcyclist lacks the structural protection, restraint systems, and crumple zones of an enclosed vehicle, the forces of the Collision caused Plaintiff to suffer injuries materially more severe than those typically sustained by occupants of passenger vehicles.

17. Plaintiff received emergency care at [HOSPITAL / EMS PROVIDER] and has since undergone [SURGERIES / HOSPITALIZATION / REHABILITATION / ONGOING TREATMENT], and will require future medical care.

18. All injuries and damages alleged were the foreseeable, natural, and probable consequence of Defendants' conduct.

4. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendant Driver)

19. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 18 as if fully set forth herein.

20. Driver Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise ordinary care in the operation of a motor vehicle, to obey the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Code, to keep a proper lookout for motorcyclists lawfully sharing the roadway, and to refrain from conduct endangering others.

21. Driver Defendant breached that duty by, among other things:

• Failing to keep a proper and careful lookout for Plaintiff's plainly visible motorcycle;
• Failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiff's oncoming or approaching motorcycle;
• Turning left across the path of Plaintiff's oncoming motorcycle when it was unsafe to do so;
• Making an unsafe lane change into the lane occupied by Plaintiff's motorcycle;
• Following Plaintiff's motorcycle more closely than was reasonable and prudent;
• Misjudging the speed and distance of Plaintiff's approaching motorcycle;
• Operating the vehicle at an excessive or unsafe speed for the conditions;
• Driving while distracted or inattentive; and
• Failing to maintain proper control of the vehicle.

22. Each of the foregoing acts and omissions, separately and in combination, was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

23. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has sustained the damages described in Section 7 below.

5. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE PER SE (Against Defendant Driver)

24. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 23 as if fully set forth herein.

25. The New Mexico Motor Vehicle Code imposes specific statutory duties on Driver Defendant for the protection of persons lawfully using the roadway, including motorcyclists such as Plaintiff. These include, as applicable to the manner of the Collision:

• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-329 — a driver within an intersection intending to turn left shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction so close as to constitute an immediate hazard (New Mexico courts have treated a hazardous failure to yield under this section as negligence per se, see Danz v. Kennon, 1957-NMSC-090);
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-328 — a driver approaching an intersection shall yield to a vehicle that has entered it, and the "vehicle on the right" rule;
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-330 — duties to stop and to yield at stop and yield signs (a collision after passing a yield sign without stopping is prima facie evidence of failure to yield);
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-318 — a driver shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent;
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-301 — speed regulation; and
• NMSA 1978, § 66-8-114 (careless driving) and/or § 66-8-113 (reckless driving).

26. Plaintiff is within the class of persons the foregoing statutes were enacted to protect, and the Collision is the type of harm those statutes were designed to prevent.

27. Driver Defendant violated [CITE THE SPECIFIC SECTION(S) APPLICABLE], and was cited for [TRAFFIC CITATION, IF ANY]. Such violation constitutes negligence per se under New Mexico law and was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. COUNT III — RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR / NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT (Against Defendant Owner)

28. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein.

29. At all material times, Driver Defendant was the agent, servant, or employee of Owner Defendant and was acting within the course and scope of that agency or employment; Owner Defendant is therefore vicariously liable for the negligence of Driver Defendant under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

30. Alternatively, Owner Defendant entrusted the subject vehicle to Driver Defendant when Owner Defendant knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care should have known, that Driver Defendant was an incompetent, inexperienced, reckless, or otherwise unfit driver.

31. Owner Defendant's vicarious liability and/or negligent entrustment was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

7. DAMAGES

32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and seeks recovery of the following, subject to proof at trial:

• Past and future medical expenses — emergency, ambulance, hospital, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitative, pharmaceutical, and physician care;
• Future medical and life care — anticipated surgeries, therapy, assistive devices, and long-term care;
• Lost wages and diminished earning capacity — past lost income and the permanent impairment of Plaintiff's ability to earn;
• Physical pain, suffering, and mental anguish — past and future;
• Permanent physical impairment and disfigurement, including scarring from road rash and surgical intervention;
• Loss of enjoyment of life and loss of household services;
• Property damage to the motorcycle, riding gear, helmet, and personal effects, including loss of use and diminution in value; and
• Punitive damages for willful, wanton, reckless, or malicious conduct, where supported by the evidence.

33. Plaintiff seeks pre-judgment and post-judgment interest under NMSA 1978, § 56-8-4, and costs under Rule 1-054(D) NMRA.

8. COMPARATIVE FAULT, HELMET, AND INSURANCE ALLEGATIONS

34. At all material times Plaintiff exercised ordinary care. To the extent any fault is attributed to Plaintiff, New Mexico's pure comparative-negligence doctrine applies, and Plaintiff's recovery shall be reduced only by Plaintiff's percentage of fault, if any, and shall not be barred.

35. Plaintiff has complied with, or will comply with, all conditions precedent applicable to any uninsured/underinsured-motorist claim and reserves all rights against the applicable UM/UIM carrier.

9. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants as follows:

• A. For compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact;
• B. For punitive damages where legally and factually justified;
• C. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest under NMSA 1978, § 56-8-4;
• D. For costs and allowable expenses under Rule 1-054(D) NMRA; and
• E. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

10. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right, pursuant to N.M. Const. art. II, § 12 and Rule 1-038 NMRA.

11. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this Complaint to add or substitute parties, to assert additional claims (including claims against any uninsured/underinsured-motorist carrier), and to conform the pleadings to the evidence pursuant to Rule 1-015 NMRA.

12. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: [__/__/____]

/s/ [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME] (NM Bar No. [________])

[LAW FIRM NAME]

Attorney for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, NM ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

13. VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], being duly sworn, state that I am the Plaintiff in the foregoing action; that I have read the foregoing Complaint; and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

[________________________________]

[PLAINTIFF NAME], Plaintiff

Subscribed and sworn to before me this [____] day of [_______________], 20[____].

[________________________________]

Notary Public

My Commission Expires: [_______________]

14. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint was served (or will be served with the summons) upon the following by [the Court's electronic filing system / U.S. First-Class Mail / personal service]:

[NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) OF DEFENDANT(S) / COUNSEL]

/s/ [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME]

15. NEW MEXICO PRACTICE NOTES

• Statute of limitations. Personal-injury actions must be commenced within three years of accrual. NMSA 1978, § 37-1-8. Wrongful-death actions carry their own three-year period (NMSA 1978, § 41-2-2). Claims against governmental entities are subject to the Tort Claims Act notice (90 days) and limitations (generally two years) under NMSA 1978, §§ 41-4-15, 41-4-16.
• PURE comparative negligence. Under Scott v. Rizzo, 1981-NMSC-021, recovery is reduced by the plaintiff's percentage of fault but is never barred. Fault is apportioned among all parties; several liability generally applies under NMSA 1978, § 41-3A-1. This is highly favorable to injured motorcyclists.
• Fault state; no no-fault/PIP. New Mexico applies traditional tort liability — there is no automobile no-fault regime and no serious-injury threshold. The at-fault driver's liability limits and the rider's own UM/UIM are the principal recovery sources; New Mexico has strict UM/UIM rejection requirements.
• Helmet law. NMSA 1978, § 66-7-356 requires an approved helmet only for operators/riders under 18, and § 66-7-356(B) provides that failure to wear a helmet "shall not constitute contributory negligence." Use this to defeat defense helmet arguments where applicable; still separate crash causation from injury causation with experts.
• Punitive damages. Available for willful, wanton, reckless, or malicious conduct (see Paiz v. State Farm; Udall v. Town of Mesilla); not recoverable against governmental entities under the Tort Claims Act. Confirm the standard and uniform jury instructions before pleading.
• Procedure. Rule 1-008(A)(3) NMRA generally bars an unnecessary specific monetary amount in the complaint. Jury demand under Rule 1-038 NMRA; venue under NMSA 1978, § 38-3-1; service under Rule 1-004 NMRA; amendment under Rule 1-015 NMRA.

16. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 (Chapter 37 — Limitation of Actions; Chapter 41 — Torts; Chapter 66 — Motor Vehicles) — https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/
• NMSA 1978, § 37-1-8 (three-year limitations)
• Scott v. Rizzo, 1981-NMSC-021, 96 N.M. 682, 634 P.2d 1234 (pure comparative negligence) — https://law.justia.com/cases/new-mexico/supreme-court/1981/13088-0.html
• NMSA 1978, § 41-3A-1 (comparative fault; several liability)
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-329 (left turn) — https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-66/article-7/part-4/section-66-7-329/
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-328 (approaching/entering intersection); § 66-7-330 (stop/yield); § 66-7-318 (following); § 66-7-301 (speed)
• NMSA 1978, § 66-8-114 (careless driving); § 66-8-113 (reckless driving)
• NMSA 1978, § 66-7-356 (motorcycle protective helmets) — https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2018/chapter-66/article-7/section-66-7-356/
• NMSA 1978, § 66-5-301 (uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage)
• New Mexico Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules 1-004, 1-008, 1-015, 1-038, 1-054 NMRA)
• New Mexico Uniform Jury Instructions — Civil (UJI 13-1501 negligence per se; comparative negligence; motor vehicle)

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in New Mexico must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.