New Mexico Anti Slapp Public Participation Free Speech Protection Acts Laws

Adkisson's Anti-SLAPP Laws Anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation Also known variously as Public Participation Acts and by other mal-descriptive & awful names.

New Mexico Anti-SLAPP Acts & Laws

Last updated 2017-06-26


N.MEX.STAT. § 38-2-9.1. Special motion to dismiss unwarranted or specious lawsuits; procedures; sanctions; severability


A. Any action seeking money damages against a person for conduct or speech undertaken or made in connection with a public hearing or public meeting in a quasi-judicial proceeding before a tribunal or decision-making body of any political subdivision of the state is subject to a special motion to dismiss, motion for judgment on the pleadings, or motion for summary judgment that shall be considered by the court on a priority or expedited basis to ensure the early consideration of the issues raised by the motion and to prevent the unnecessary expense of litigation.


B. If the rights afforded by this section are raised as an affirmative defense and if a court grants a motion to dismiss, a motion for judgment on the pleadings or a motion for summary judgment filed within ninety days of the filing of the moving party's answer, the court shall award reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred by the moving party in defending the action. If the court finds that a special motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment is frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay, the court shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to the party prevailing on the motion.


C. Any party shall have the right to an expedited appeal from a trial court order on the special motions described in Subsection B of this section or from a trial court's failure to rule on the motion on an expedited basis.


D. As used in this section, a "public meeting in a quasi-judicial proceeding" means and includes any meeting established and held by a state or local governmental entity, including without limitations, meetings or presentations before state, city, town or village councils, planning commissions, review boards or commissions.


E. Nothing in this section limits or prohibits the exercise of a right or remedy of a party granted pursuant to another constitutional, statutory, common law or administrative provision, including civil actions for defamation or malicious abuse of process.


F. If any provision of this section or the application of any provision of this section to a person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this section that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this section are severable.


N.MEX.STAT. § 38-2-9.2. Findings and purpose


The legislature declares that it is the public policy of New Mexico to protect the rights of its citizens to participate in quasi-judicial proceedings before local and state governmental tribunals. Baseless civil lawsuits seeking or claiming millions of dollars have been filed against persons for exercising their right to petition and to participate in quasi- judicial proceedings before governmental tribunals. Such lawsuits can be an abuse of the legal process and can impose an undue financial burden on those having to respond to and defend such lawsuits and may chill and punish participation in public affairs and the institutions of democratic government. These lawsuits should be subject to prompt dismissal or judgment to prevent the abuse of the legal process and avoid the burden imposed by such baseless lawsuits.




Drafting Committee for a Uniform Anti-SLAPP Act (mostly lately called the "Uniform Public Expression Protection Act"), began its project in 2017 and hopes to submit final Uniform Act by 2020. The author of this website, Jay D. Adkisson, is the American Bar Association's Business Law Section Adviser to this Committee, and the originator of this Uniform Law Commission project. Click here for more.




2020.07.20 ... Uniform Law Commission Approves New Anti-SLAPP Law In Time For Consideration By New York Legislature

2017.01.13 ... Minnesota Court Of Appeals Boots Clear And Convincing Anti-SLAPP Burden Of Proof

2015.8.29 ... A Call For A Uniform Anti-SLAPP Act




Arizona  ..... A.R.S. § 12-751, et seq.


Alabama ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Alaska ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Arkansas  ..... A.C.A. § 16-63-502, et seq.


California  ..... C.C.P. § 425.16, et seq.


Colorado ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Connecticut ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Delaware  ..... 10 Del.C. § 8136, et seq.


Florida  ..... F.S. § 768.295


Georgia  ..... Ga.C. § 9-11-11.1.


Hawaii  ..... HRS § 634F-1, et seq.


Idaho ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Illinois  ..... 735 ILCS 110/1, et seq.


Indiana  ..... I.C. § 34-7-7-1, et seq.


Iowa ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Kansas  ..... Kan.Stat. § 60-5320


Kentucky ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Louisiana  ..... C.C.P. Art. 971


Maine  ..... 14 Me.R.S. § 556


Maryland  ..... MD Code, Courts & Jud. Proceedings § 5-807


Massachusetts  ..... M.G.L. 231 § 59H


Michigan ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Minnesota  ..... Mn.Stat. § 554.01, et seq.


Mississippi ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Missouri  ..... Mo.Stat. § 537.528


Montana ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Nebraska  ..... Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-21, 242, et seq.


Nevada  ..... N.R.S. § 41.635, et seq.



New Hampshire ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


New Jersey ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


New Mexico  ..... N.Mex.Stat. § 38-2-9.1, et seq.


New York  ..... N.Y.Civ.Rights.L. § 70-a.


North Carolina ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


North Dakota ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Ohio ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Oklahoma  ..... Okla.Stat. § 12-1430, et seq.


Oregon  ..... O.R.S. § 31.150, et seq.


Pennsylvania  ..... 27 Pa.C.S.A. § 7707.


Rhode Island  ..... R.I.Gen.Laws § 9-33-1, et seq.


South Carolina ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


South Dakota ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Tennessee  ..... Tenn.Stat. § 4-21-1001, et seq.


Texas  ..... Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code § 27.001, et seq.


Utah  ..... Utah Code § 78B-6-1401, et seq.


Vermont  ..... 12 V.S. § 1041.


Virginia ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Washington  ..... Wa.Stat. § 4.24.525.


West Virginia ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Wisconsin ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


Wyoming ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


District of Columbia  ..... D.C.St. § 16-5501, et seq.


Guam ..... 7 G.C.A. § 17101, et seq.


Puerto Rico ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


U.S. Virgin Islands ..... No Anti-SLAPP statute when last checked.


FEDERAL LEGISLATION: Speak Free Act of 2015 (not enacted, presumed dead).



by Jay D. Adkisson


  • Jay Adkisson - More about Jay D. Adkisson, background, books, articles, speaking appearances.


  • Captive Insurance Companies - Licensed insurance companies formed by the parent organization to handle the insurance and risk management needs of the business, by the author of the best-selling book on the topic: Adkisson's Captive Insurance Companies.


  • Asset Protection Book - The all-time best-selling book on asset protection planning by Jay Adkisson and Chris Riser.


  • Judgment Collection - An explanation of common creditor remedies, strategies and tactics to enforce a judgment, including a discussion of common debtor asset protection strategies.


  • Voidable Transactions - Discussion of the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (a/k/a 2014 Revision of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act) and fraudulent transfer law in general.


  • Private Retirement Plans - An exploration of a unique creditor exemption allowed under California law which can be very beneficial but is often misused.


  • Charging Orders - The confusing remedy against a debtor's interest in an LLC or partnership is explained in reference to the Uniform Partnership Act, the Uniform Limited Partnership Act, and the Uniform Limited Liability Company Act.


  • Protected Series LLCs - An examination of the single most complex statutory legal structure yet created, with particular reference to the Uniform Protected Series Act of 2017.


  • California Enforcement of Judgments Law - Considers the topic of judgment enforcement in California, including the California Enforcement of Judgments Law and other laws related to California creditor-debtor issues.


© 2020 by Jay D. Adkisson. All Rights Reserved. No claim to original government works. The information contained in this website is for general educational purposes only, does not constitute any legal advice or opinion, and should not be relied upon in relation to particular cases. Use this information at your own peril; it is no substitute for the legal advice or opinion of an attorney licensed to practice law in the appropriate jurisdiction. Questions about this website should be directed to jay [at] or by phone to 702-953-9617 or by fax to 877-698-0678. This website is