New Mexico ATV, UTV & Side-by-Side Accident Lawyer

What New Mexico Law Means After an Off-Highway Vehicle Injury

Section 37-1-8 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 provides that actions "for an injury to the person or reputation of any person" must be brought "within three years." If you were hurt in a crash involving a private person or business, that three-year period is the general outer limit for a lawsuit; a suit filed after it may be lost.

The type of vehicle affects how a claim is framed. Federal law defines an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) as a motorized, off-highway vehicle "designed to travel on 3 or 4 wheels, having a seat designed to be straddled by the operator and handlebars for steering control," under 15 U.S.C. § 2089. A utility task vehicle (UTV) or side-by-side, in everyday use, is an off-highway vehicle in which riders sit next to each other rather than straddling a seat. That difference matters for the federal safety standard discussed below.

Fault is governed by case law. In Scott v. Rizzo (1981), the New Mexico Supreme Court adopted pure comparative negligence, meaning a person's own carelessness reduces what they can recover rather than wiping it out. Section 41-3A-1 adds a rule about defendants, explained below.

For context, CPSC's 2025 off-highway vehicle report lists fatal incidents and deaths from off-highway vehicle incidents by state for 2020 through 2022, out of 2,685 reported deaths nationally. CPSC states the counts are "not adjusted for state-level demographic characteristics (i.e., total population, age distribution)," "reflect the state and year in which the incident occurred," and that it received "limited or no death certificate data from a handful of states." The broader federal data is on the site's ATV accident statistics page.

Early questions people often weigh include the exact crash date, which kind of vehicle was involved, and whether any public body may be part of the picture, since that path has its own, shorter timeline.

What the 90-Day Notice Deadline Means If a Government Entity Was Involved

Claims against the state or a local public body fall under the Tort Claims Act, sections 41-4-1 through 41-4-30 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, and its deadlines are shorter than the general three years.

Section 41-4-16 requires a person claiming damages from the state or a local public body to present "a written notice stating the time, place and circumstances of the loss or injury" within ninety days after an occurrence giving rise to a claim for which immunity has been waived. The notice goes to the risk management division for claims against the state, the mayor for a municipality, the school superintendent for a school district, the county clerk for a county, or the administrative head of any other local public body.

For a wrongful death, the same section allows notice within six months after the date of the occurrence of the injury that resulted in the death. It may be presented by the personal representative, by anyone claiming benefits of the proceeds, or by the consular officer of the country of which the deceased was a citizen. If the person who died had already presented a notice that would have been sufficient had he lived, no additional notice is needed.

Section 41-4-15 then provides that tort actions against a governmental entity or public employee "shall be forever barred" unless commenced within two years after the date of occurrence, except that a child under seven has until his ninth birthday. That subsection applies "regardless of minority or other legal disability."

If your crash happened on public land, on a government-maintained road or trail, or involved a public vehicle or employee, these shorter rules may apply instead of the general three years. People in this position often ask who owned or maintained the place, which office would receive notice, and how much of the ninety days has passed. An attorney can help sort out whether a public body is involved at all.

Common Crash Types and the Claims They Can Raise in New Mexico

Off-highway vehicle crashes take several forms. A rollover is when the vehicle tips onto its side or roof. An ejection is when a rider is thrown from the vehicle. A restraint is a seat belt, harness or net meant to keep an occupant inside. Nationally, CPSC's report states that the most common fatality hazards were overturns and collisions, and that occupants "were frequently ejected" in those incidents.

What happened in your crash points toward which claim may fit, and each asks a different question:

• Recreational negligence: how someone operated or supervised a ride, such as another rider or a rental operator.
• Premises liability: the condition of the land or trail and who controlled it.
• Product liability: whether a defect in the vehicle's design, manufacture or warnings caused the injury.

A rollover or crash is not, by itself, evidence of a defect. A negligence claim asks about a duty, its breach, causation and damages; a product claim asks whether there was a defect and whether it caused the injury. Whether either is met depends on the facts. The site's page on a UTV rollover lawyer walks through that distinction for side-by-sides.

Federal rules add one layer for ATVs only. The mandatory standard in 15 U.S.C. § 2089 and 16 C.F.R. part 1420 applies to all-terrain vehicles as federal law defines them. Under 16 C.F.R. § 1420.3, ATVs made before January 1, 2025, must meet ANSI/SVIA 1-2017, and those made on or after that date must meet ANSI/SVIA 1-2023, except its owner's-manual section. That text does not extend the standard to UTVs or side-by-sides. More is on the CPSC ATV safety standard page.

Useful next questions include how the vehicle behaved just before the crash, who was operating it, and what the terrain was like; the answers help an attorney see which theory, if any, applies.

Who May Be Responsible for Your Injuries

Depending on the facts, the parties in a New Mexico off-highway vehicle case can include the vehicle or component manufacturer, a distributor or seller, a property owner or operator, another rider, or an employer where a UTV was used for work. Workers' compensation questions belong to a different area of law and are not covered here.

Identifying every party matters because, as the next section explains, each defendant generally answers only for its own share. Each type of party raises a different question. A manufacturer's case turns on whether a defect existed and caused harm. A landowner's turns on the property's condition and control; New Mexico's Supreme Court has noted that its common law "has long recognized that premises liability claims can lie for injuries occurring outside a property's boundary." Another rider's turns on how they operated. A public body brings in the Tort Claims Act deadlines above.

If a vehicle or part may be involved, a recall can be relevant. A recall is a corrective action for a safety problem in a product. For you, an existing recall can be a lead worth checking, but it is not proof. Under 15 U.S.C. § 2064, manufacturers, distributors and retailers must tell CPSC when information reasonably supports the conclusion that a product contains certain defects or creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, and CPSC may order repair, replacement or a refund. 16 C.F.R. § 1115.4 describes a defect as "a fault, flaw, or irregularity that causes weakness, failure, or inadequacy in form or function." A recall is not a finding that a product injured anyone.

People in this position often gather who owned the vehicle, who owned or managed the land, and whether a recall notice exists. An attorney can help match those facts to the theory each party's responsibility would require.

How Your Own Share of Fault Affects a New Mexico Recovery

Insurers and defendants in off-highway cases often point to the rider: speed, gear, a passenger count, a trail choice. New Mexico law answers that argument in a particular way.

In Scott v. Rizzo, the New Mexico Supreme Court held:

"We therefore hold that a pure comparative negligence standard shall supersede prior law in New Mexico, and that a plaintiff suing in negligence shall no longer be totally barred from recovery because of his contributory negligence."

The court explained that pure comparative negligence "denies recovery for one's own fault; and it holds all parties fully responsible for their own respective acts to the degree that those acts have caused harm." In plain terms, if you are found partly at fault, your recovery is reduced by your share rather than eliminated, and the court rejected versions of the rule that cut off recovery at 50 percent.

Section 41-3A-1 addresses defendants. In a case where comparative fault applies, "the doctrine imposing joint and several liability upon two or more wrongdoers whose conduct proximately caused an injury to any plaintiff is abolished except as otherwise provided hereafter. The liability of any such defendants shall be several." For an injured person, several liability generally means each defendant pays only its own share, subject to the statute's exceptions, so a party left out of the case can leave part of the loss uncovered.

How fault might be divided is rarely clear on day one. People often weigh who was driving, how the vehicle behaved, the terrain and what others did, and an attorney can help assess how each fact could shift the shares.

Why Records Matter to a New Mexico Claim

Because fault is divided by share, and because several defendants may each answer only for their own part, gaps in the record can reduce a recovery or leave a responsible party unidentified. For a public-body claim, missing facts can also undercut the ninety-day notice.

If you were hurt, medical records from the first emergency visit onward show the injuries and treatment. Photographs and video of the scene, terrain and vehicle show conditions that may bear on premises or negligence questions. Incident or police reports record an early account. Names and contact details of witnesses, other riders and anyone who helped afterward can confirm who did what.

Where a vehicle or part may be at issue, the vehicle itself and any damaged components are often central, because a defect question turns on the physical evidence. Purchase records or order history, the owner's manual and labels, any original packaging, and any recall or safety notice help identify the model and its warnings. For a rental, the rental agreement and any safety briefing materials bear on how the ride was supervised.

For a possible claim against a public body, the date, place and circumstances of the crash become the core of the written notice section 41-4-16 describes. What a family already has, what may still be obtainable and what each item shows are questions an attorney can help sort through.

Wrongful Death After a Fatal Off-Highway Vehicle Crash in New Mexico

Losing someone in a rollover or collision leaves a family with grief and, often, questions they never expected to face. New Mexico's wrongful-death statutes answer two of the first ones directly.

Section 41-2-2 provides that every wrongful-death action "must be brought within three years after the cause of action accrues. The cause of action accrues as of the date of death." Where a person died days or weeks after the crash, the period runs from the death.

Section 41-2-3 provides that the action "shall be brought by and in the name of the personal representative of the deceased person." Individual relatives do not file in their own names. The same section lets the jury award "such damages, compensatory and exemplary, as they deem fair and just," considering "the pecuniary injury resulting from the death to the surviving party entitled to the judgment" and "the mitigating or aggravating circumstances attending the wrongful act, neglect or default." What may be allowed depends on those circumstances and the facts.

If a public body may be involved, the six-month notice rule in section 41-4-16 and the two-year suit limit in section 41-4-15 apply alongside these rules. Who will serve as personal representative and which deadlines govern are early questions, and requesting a case evaluation offers a way to talk them through with our attorney.

What the Filing Deadlines Mean When the Injured Person Is a Minor

Section 37-1-10 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 provides that the time limits in that chapter, "in favor of minors and incapacitated persons, be extended so that they shall have one year from and after the termination of such incapacity within which to commence said actions." For a child's own injury claim, that extension works alongside the three-year period in section 37-1-8.

The Tort Claims Act runs on its own schedule. Section 41-4-15 states that a child under seven has until the ninth birthday to file against a governmental entity, and that the two-year subsection otherwise "applies to all persons regardless of minority or other legal disability." The ninety-day notice requirement in section 41-4-16 is stated without a minors' exception. If your child was hurt where a public body may be involved, the extended private-claim timeline may not help with that notice.

A parent may also have questions about a claim of their own, such as for a child's medical bills. Whether that claim exists, and which period governs it, depends on New Mexico's current law. Parents often weigh the child's age, where the crash happened and who was involved, and an attorney can help sort out which clock applies to the child and to the parent. The site's ATV accident lawyer page covers how these claims work generally.