Motion to Compel Production of Documents in New Mexico

Background

Under Rule 1–034 NMRA, “a party may serve a request for production of documents to which the recipient is obligated to respond within thirty days.” (Little v. Baigas (2016) 390 P.3d 201, 208 n.2 citing id.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“Rule 1–037(A)(2) NMRA provides for ‘a party's motion to compel discovery if an interrogatory has not been answered or document has not been provided pursuant to a lawful request under Rule 1-033 (interrogatories) or Rule 1–034 (requests for production).’” (Little v. Baigas (2016) 390 P.3d 201, 208 n.3 citing id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

Motions to compel discovery are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. (See, Villanueva v. Sunday School Bd., 121 N.M. 98, 105 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995) [holding that “the judge did not abuse her discretion in denying Worker's motion to compel discovery.” see also, Kerman v. Swafford (1984) 101 N.M. 241, 245.)

The Court’s Decision

“[R]emedies for the violation of discovery rules or orders are discretionary with the trial court.” (Chavez v. Brd. of Cnty. Commissioners, Curry (2001) 130 N.M. 753, 764 citing Shamalon Bird Farm, Ltd. v. United States Fid. Guar. Co. (1991) 111 N.M. 713, 716.)

“[A] party who seeks to challenge an order granting a motion to compel discovery ... can either apply for an interlocutory appeal or refuse to comply, be held in contempt and file an appeal as of right from both the contempt judgment and the underlying discovery order on which the contempt was based.” (Boulanger v. Rio Rancho Pub. Sch., No. A-1-CA-36953, at *3 n.1 [N.M. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2021] citing King v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2004-NMCA-031, ¶ 19, 135 N.M. 206.)