An execution may issue at any time, on behalf of anyone interested in a judgment, within seven years after the rendition or revival of the judgment.
History: Laws 1887, ch. 61, § 2; C.L. 1897, § 3086; Code 1915, § 3086; C.S. 1929, § 76-118; 1941 Comp., § 19-920; 1953 Comp., § 21-9-20; Laws 1965, ch. 282, § 2; 1971, ch. 122, § 2.
Cross references. — For execution and foreclosure generally, see 39-4-1 NMSA 1978 et seq.
For attachment and garnishment generally, see 42-9-1 NMSA 1978 et seq.
For stay of proceedings to enforce a judgment, see Rule 1-062 NMRA.
For supplementary judgment proceedings, see Rule 1-069 NMRA.
Revival of judgment. — Section 39-1-20 NMSA 1978 prohibits execution on a judgment more than seven years after its issuance or revival. Plaintiff is free to pursue his execution remedy through a different procedure. Nothing in Section 39-1-20 NMSA 1978 prohibits a judgment creditor from seeking execution following revival under Section 37-1-2 NMSA 1978. Fischoff v. Tometich, 1991-NMCA-144, 113 N.M. 271, 824 P.2d 1073.
Scire facias to revive judgment is included in word "action" in this section. Browne v. Chavez, 181 U.S. 68, 21 S. Ct. 514, 45 L. Ed. 752 (1901) (decided under former law).
Claim of exemption not effective under second execution. — A claim of exemption made under an original execution did not remain effective to prevent a sale under a second or alias execution. Meyers Co. v. Mirabal, 1921-NMSC-098, 27 N.M. 472, 202 P. 693.
Foreign judgments later domesticated. — Actions to domesticate a foreign judgment are governed by 37-1-2 NMSA 1978 and as such these actions must be brought within the applicable period of limitation for foreign judgments. Accordingly, a 1989 judgment on the domestication issue converted the foreign judgment into a New Mexico judgment from which date the applicable state statutes of limitations commenced running. Plaintiff's 1992 action for a charging order based on the 1989 judgment satisfied the three alternative state statutes of limitations (37-1-4, 39-1-20, 37-1-2 NMSA 1978) and does not force a decision on the "correct" statute. Galef v. Buena Vista Dairy, 1994-NMCA-068, 117 N.M. 701, 875 P.2d 1132.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Part payment or promise to pay judgment as affecting time for execution, 45 A.L.R.2d 967.
49 C.J.S. Judgments §§ 585, 586.
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.