New Mexico
Motorcycle Accident Laws in New Mexico (2026): Deadlines
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 18, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 18, 2026. · 4 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

A motorcycle crash in New Mexico is governed by a mix of general tort rules and a few motorcycle-specific statutes that can shift the value of a claim. New Mexico is a traditional at-fault state with a relatively generous filing deadline and one of the most plaintiff-friendly fault rules in the country, and its helmet statute includes a protection that surprises many riders. This guide walks through the New Mexico rules that shape a motorcycle-injury or wrongful-death claim, starting with the deadline and the fault rule, then the helmet, insurance, and lane rules that are specific to riders. It is general information, not legal advice.
This page is part of our Motorcycle Accident Laws by State series. Deadlines are firm and every crash is different, so treat the figures below as a starting point and confirm the current law before relying on it.
The New Mexico deadline to sue (statute of limitations)
The first thing to protect after a motorcycle crash in New Mexico is the deadline. A negligence-based personal-injury lawsuit must generally be filed within three years of the crash under NMSA 37-1-8, which sets a three-year limit for actions for an injury to the person. A wrongful-death action carries the same three-year period under NMSA 41-2-2, measured from the date of death rather than the date of the injury.
The clock generally starts on the date of the crash for an injury claim and on the date of death for a wrongful-death claim. There are narrow exceptions, including tolling for injured minors and people who are incapacitated. Three years is longer than many states allow, but the deadline is still firm, so the safe assumption is that the clock is already running.
How New Mexico splits fault: pure comparative negligence
New Mexico follows pure comparative negligence, which the New Mexico Supreme Court adopted in Scott v. Rizzo. Under this rule, a jury assigns each party a percentage of fault, and the injured person's recovery is reduced by their own percentage, but there is no cutoff that bars recovery. A rider found 70 percent at fault still recovers 30 percent of the damages. This is more favorable to injured people than the modified systems used in most states, where being more than half at fault ends the case.
That does not make fault irrelevant. Insurers in motorcycle cases often try to push a large share onto the rider, sometimes leaning on stereotypes about speed or risk-taking, because every percentage point of fault still reduces the recovery. Solid evidence that the other driver caused the crash, covered below, protects the value of the claim.
No-fault and how New Mexico handles insurance claims
New Mexico is a traditional at-fault, or tort, state. It does not use a no-fault system, and Personal Injury Protection (PIP) is not required and generally not even offered. After a crash, an injured rider does not turn to a no-fault policy first; instead the rider pursues the at-fault driver and that driver's liability insurer, and can also draw on the rider's own uninsured/underinsured-motorist or medical-payments coverage. Because there is no no-fault threshold to clear, a rider can sue for the full range of damages, including pain and suffering, from the start.

New Mexico's helmet law
New Mexico has a partial helmet law. Under NMSA 66-7-356, every motorcycle operator and passenger under the age of 18 must wear a securely fastened protective helmet that meets federal safety standards. Riders 18 and older are not required to wear a helmet. Eye protection comes from a different statute: NMSA 66-7-355(B) requires a person operating a motorcycle that does not have an approved fixed windshield to wear an approved eye protective device, and by its terms that duty runs to the operator rather than to a passenger. Section 66-7-356 itself carries no penalty provision; the subsection that once made a violation a petty misdemeanor was deleted by a 1991 amendment, and under NMSA 66-8-7 a Motor Vehicle Code violation for which no other penalty is specified is a misdemeanor.
Can the helmet question reduce your damages?
New Mexico is protective of riders on this point, but the protection is narrower than it first appears. The same statute that requires helmets for those under 18, NMSA 66-7-356(B), provides that failure to wear a safety helmet as required in that section does not constitute contributory negligence. Read against its own terms, that bar tracks the duty the section creates, which reaches only operators and passengers under 18. For an adult rider the protection comes from the other direction: the section imposes no helmet duty on an adult at all, so there is no statutory helmet violation for a defendant to build a contributory-negligence argument on. Either way, riding bare-headed is not a statutory fault argument in New Mexico, though for an adult the point rests on the absence of a duty rather than on the wording of Subsection B. The statute does not, by its own terms, bar a separate argument that a missing helmet made a specific head injury worse, a mitigation-of-damages or causation theory rather than a fault argument, and some insurers still try to raise it. Whether that argument succeeds is a separate question from the contributory-negligence bar the statute creates, so confirm the point with a New Mexico attorney if a significant head injury is involved.
Lane splitting in New Mexico
Lane splitting, riding a motorcycle between lanes of stopped or slow traffic, is not permitted in New Mexico for civilian riders. No statute authorizes it, and a rider who splits lanes can be cited and exposed to a larger share of fault if a crash results. California has expressly legalized lane splitting, and several other states have since authorized a narrower form of lane filtering: Arizona lets a two-wheeled motorcycle pass a stopped vehicle in the same lane and operate between lanes at no more than 15 mph on a road posted at 45 mph or less (Ariz. Rev. Stat. 28-903(F)), and Minnesota allows passing within the same lane at not more than 25 mph (Minn. Stat. 169.974, subd. 5). New Mexico has authorized neither.

Damage caps and minimum insurance
New Mexico does not cap compensatory damages in an ordinary motorcycle-injury or wrongful-death case, so medical bills, lost earnings, and pain and suffering are generally not subject to a statutory ceiling. Separate caps apply to claims against government entities under the Tort Claims Act and to medical-malpractice cases, but those are special contexts. On insurance, New Mexico requires minimum liability coverage of 25/50/10, meaning $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury and $10,000 for property damage. Because that is a relatively low floor, an at-fault driver may be underinsured for a serious motorcycle injury, which is why a rider's own uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage is often the most important policy in the case.
Why motorcycle cases are different
Motorcycle crashes tend to produce more severe injuries than car crashes because a rider has no surrounding cabin, and the New Mexico-specific rules above shape how a claim plays out: a partial helmet law, a statutory bar on the helmet defense, a pure comparative-fault rule, and juries that can still carry bias against riders. Each of those is a reason that careful documentation of how the crash actually happened, and of the full extent of the injuries, can change the outcome of a claim.
Evidence and how to evaluate a claim
The strongest evidence in a motorcycle case is often gathered in the first days. The police crash report, photographs of the scene, the vehicles, and the rider's gear, the helmet itself if one was worn, witness contact information, and complete medical records all help establish both fault and the severity of the harm. Most personal-injury lawyers in New Mexico work on a contingency fee, meaning the fee is a percentage of any recovery with usually no upfront cost, and many offer a free initial consultation. No lawyer can promise a specific result or dollar figure, because the outcome depends on liability, the available insurance, the comparative-fault split, and the harm actually proven. The practical points are clear: a three-year clock is running, the evidence is perishable, and pinning down the facts early protects the case. While the evidence is still fresh, let a New Mexico motorcycle accident lawyer collect it and pin down how the crash happened, starting with a free claim review (attorney advertising).

Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue after a motorcycle accident in New Mexico?
New Mexico generally gives you three years from the date of the crash to file a personal-injury lawsuit under NMSA 37-1-8, and three years from the date of death for a wrongful-death claim under NMSA 41-2-2. A few narrow exceptions can pause the clock, such as for injured minors, but you should confirm your specific deadline early, because once it passes the claim is usually barred.
Is failing to wear a helmet going to hurt my case in New Mexico?
Generally not as a fault argument. Only operators and passengers under 18 must wear a helmet under NMSA 66-7-356, and that same statute provides that failure to wear a helmet as required in that section does not constitute contributory negligence. For an adult rider the section imposes no helmet duty at all, so there is no statutory helmet violation for a defendant to hang a contributory-negligence argument on. The statute does not foreclose a separate argument that a missing helmet made a specific head injury worse, so confirm the point with a New Mexico attorney if a head injury is involved.
Is lane splitting legal in New Mexico?
No. Lane splitting, riding between lanes of stopped or slow-moving traffic, is not permitted in New Mexico for civilian riders, and no statute authorizes it. A rider who lane splits can be ticketed and may be assigned a larger share of fault if a crash results, which reduces recovery under the state's comparative-fault rule.
How much is a motorcycle accident case worth?
There is no set figure and no one can honestly promise an amount. Value depends on the severity of the injuries, the medical bills and lost income, the available insurance (including your own uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage), and your share of fault under New Mexico's pure comparative-negligence rule. New Mexico does not cap compensatory damages in ordinary crash cases, but the actual recovery still turns on the proof in your specific case.
Updates
Corrected the helmet section (eye protection is required of operators without an approved windshield under NMSA 66-7-355(B), and NMSA 66-7-356 carries no penalty of its own), stated the "as required in this section" limit on the statutory contributory-negligence bar, replaced an inaccurate claim that California is the only state permitting lane splitting, and fixed a statute-of-limitations link that pointed at a homepage instead of NMSA 37-1-8.
Corrected the helmet-defense discussion to clarify that NMSA 66-7-356(B) bars only a contributory-negligence argument over an adult rider's helmet non-use. It does not by its own terms foreclose a defendant from separately arguing that a missing helmet worsened the severity of a specific head injury, so that narrower mitigation-of-damages argument remains open and is a question to confirm with a New Mexico attorney.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 66
§ 66-7-356Mandatory use of protective helmetsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. No person under the age of eighteen shall operate a motorcycle unless the person is wearing a safety helmet that is securely fastened on the person's head in a normal manner as headgear and that meets the standards specified by the secretary. The secretary shall adopt rules and regulations establishing standards covering the types of helmets and the specifications therefor and shall establish and maintain a list of approved helmets meeting the standards and specifications of the secretary. No dealer or person who leases or rents motorcycles shall lease or rent a motorcycle to a person under the age of eighteen unless the lessee or renter shows such person a valid driver's license or permit and possesses the safety equipment required of an operator who is under the age of eighteen. No person shall carry any passenger under the age of eighteen on any motorcycle unless the passenger is wearing a securely fastened safety helmet, as specified in this section, meeting the standards specified by the secretary. B. Failure to wear a safety helmet as required in this section shall not constitute contributory negligence. C.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1984
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Thomas Ex Rel. Patterson v. Henson (New Mexico Court of Appeals 1984, 102 N.M. 417)“…o use them. Two statutes, however, impose statutory duties. NMSA 1978, Sections 66-7-356 and -369 (Cum.Supp.1984) impose duties,…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 66-7-355Riding on motorcyclesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
A. A person operating a motorcycle, other than an autocycle, shall ride only upon the permanent and regular seat attached thereto, shall have the person's feet upon the footrests provided on the machine and shall not carry any other person nor shall any other person ride on the motorcycle unless it is designed to carry more than one person. If a motorcycle, other than an autocycle, is designed to carry more than one person, the passenger may ride upon the permanent and regular seat if designed for two persons or upon another seat firmly attached to the rear or side of the motorcycle. The passenger shall have the passenger's feet upon the footrests attached for passenger use. B. A person operating a motorcycle not having a fixed windshield of a type approved by regulation of the secretary shall wear an eye protective device, which may be a faceshield attached to a safety helmet, goggles or safety eyeglasses. All eye protective devices shall be of a type approved by regulations promulgated by the secretary. C. A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a penalty assessment misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
§ 66-8-7Penalty for misdemeanorIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
A. It is a misdemeanor for any person to violate any provision of the Motor Vehicle Code [66-1-1 NMSA 1978] unless the violation is declared a felony. B. Unless another penalty is specified in the Motor Vehicle Code, every person convicted of a misdemeanor for violation of any provision of the Motor Vehicle Code shall be punished by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars ($300) or by imprisonment for not more than ninety days or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 17 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Ingram (New Mexico Court of Appeals 1998, 126 N.M. 426)“…00, or imprisonment for not more than 90 days, or both. See NMSA 1978, § 66-8-7 (1989). The trial court sentenced Defen…”
- State v. Greyeyes (New Mexico Court of Appeals 1987, 105 N.M. 549)“…Defendant was not convicted of a felony, but a misdemeanor. NMSA 1978, §§ 66-8-7 and -102 (Cum.Supp.1986). Cf. Boone v.…”
- State v. Vandenberg (New Mexico Court of Appeals 2002, 132 N.M. 354)“…oreign material and in a condition to be clearly legible. NMSA 1978, § 66-8-7(A) (1978) declares that "[i]t is a misd…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Mexico Open Container Law (2026): Statute and Penalty, Is Reckless Driving a Misdemeanor in New Mexico? Penalties and Points
New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 37
§ 37-1-8Actions against sureties on fiduciary bonds; injuries to person or reputation.In forcecited in 17 of our articles
Actions must be brought against sureties on official bonds and on bonds of guardians, conservators, personal representatives and persons acting in a fiduciary capacity, within two years after the liability of the principal or the person for whom they are sureties is finally established or determined by a judgment or decree of the court, and for an injury to the person or reputation of any person, within three years.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 172 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Roberts v. Southwest Community Health Services (1992) applied Section 37-1-8's three-year period to a malpractice claim against a nonqualified health care provider and held such a claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or should know of the injury and its cause. Williams v. Stewart (2005) applied that period to distress claims.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Maestas v. Zager (New Mexico Court of Appeals 2005, 136 N.M. 764)“…tes are the general personal injury statute of limitations, NMSA 1978, § 37-1-8 (1976); the Medical Malpractice Act sta…”
- Garcia on Behalf of Garcia v. La Farge (New Mexico Supreme Court 1995, 119 N.M. 532)✓A cardiologist twice told a boy's parents he was fine; after cardiac arrest left him brain damaged, the court held the Malpractice Act limit unconstitutional as applied and used Section 37-1-8's three year accrual period instead, making the suit timely.
- Williams v. Stewart (New Mexico Court of Appeals 2005, 137 N.M. 420)✓Relatives sued over a Los Alamos program that took organs during autopsies without consent; the court applied Section 37-1-8's three year personal injury period to their claims and held news publicity did not, as a matter of law, trigger a duty to inquire that started it running.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Mexico Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, New Mexico Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, New Mexico Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim
New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 41
§ 41-2-2Limitation of actionsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
Every action instituted by virtue of the provisions of this and the preceding section [41-2-1 NMSA 1978] must be brought within three years after the cause of action accrues. The cause of action accrues as of the date of death.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nmonesource.com
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Marrujo v. New Mexico State Highway Transportation Department (New Mexico Supreme Court 1994, 118 N.M. 753)“…re “[t]he cause of action accrues as of the date of death.” NMSA 1978, § 41-2-2 (Repl.Pamp.1989). They claim the dispar…”
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Luebbers ex rel. Salazar (New Mexico Court of Appeals 2005, 138 N.M. 289)“…ful death action elapsed before the current case was filed. NMSA 1978, § 41-2-2 (1961). Historically, New Mexico has ap…”
- Molinar v. City of Carlsbad (New Mexico Supreme Court 1987, 105 N.M. 628)“…ction 37-1-24 to the limitations of the Wrongful Death Act (NMSA 1978, § 41-2-2 (Repl.Pamp.1986)), and the Workmen’s Co…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Mexico Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type, Truck Accident Laws in New Mexico (2026): Deadlines & Liability, New Mexico Wrongful Death Laws (2026): Deadlines
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 28 (Transportation), Chapter 3 (TRAFFIC AND VEHICLE REGULATION), Article 15 (Miscellaneous Rules)
§ 28-903Operation of motorcycle on laned roadway; exceptionsIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
A. All motorcycles are entitled to the full use of a lane. A person shall not drive a motor vehicle in such a manner as to deprive any motorcycle of the full use of a lane. This subsection does not apply to motorcycles operated two abreast in a single lane. B. Except as provided in subsection F of this section, the operator of a motorcycle shall not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken. C. Except as provided in subsection F of this section, a person shall not operate a motorcycle between the lanes of traffic or between adjacent rows of vehicles. D. A person shall not operate a motorcycle more than two abreast in a single lane. E. Subsections B and C of this section do not apply to peace officers in the performance of their official duties. F. The operator of a two-wheeled motorcycle may overtake and pass another vehicle that is stopped in the same direction of travel and in the same lane as the operator and may operate the motorcycle between lanes of traffic if the movement may be made safely and if the operator does both of the following: 1.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Also relied on in: Is Lane Splitting Legal in Arizona? Lane Filtering Rules (2026), Motorcycle Accident Laws in Arizona (2026): Deadlines & Helmets
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 169: TRAFFIC REGULATIONS
§ 169.974OPERATION OF MOTORCYCLE; MOTOR SCOOTER; MOTOR BIKEIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
Subdivision 1. Definition. Motorcycles as used herein shall mean the vehicles defined in section 169.011, subdivision 44. Subd. 2. License endorsement and permit requirements. (a) A person must not operate a motorcycle on any street or highway without having a valid driver's license with a motorcycle endorsement as provided by law. A person may operate an autocycle without a motorcycle endorsement if the person has a valid driver's license issued under section 171.02. (b) The commissioner of public safety must issue a motorcycle endorsement only if the applicant (1) has in possession a valid motorcycle instruction permit as provided in paragraph (c), (2) has passed a written examination and road test administered by the Department of Public Safety for the endorsement, and (3) in the case of applicants under 18 years of age, presents a certificate or other evidence of having successfully completed an approved motorcycle driver's safety course in this or another state, in accordance with rules adopted by the commissioner of public safety for courses offered by a public, private, or commercial school or institute.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mn.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1988
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Leonard v. Parrish (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 1988, 420 N.W.2d 629)“…d Kurschner negligent, but reduced Leonard’s recovery under Minn.Stat. § 169.974, subd. 6, because she was not wearing a…”
- Johnson v. Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 1987, 414 N.W.2d 425)“…ses admissible on the *433 issue of damages. Minn.Stat. § 169.974, subd. 6 (1986).) In Rogers ,…”
- Northway v. Madsen (Court of Appeals of Minnesota 1986, 390 N.W.2d 435)“…the trial court gave the following instruction based upon Minn.Stat. § 169.974, subd. 6 (1980): In an action to…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is Lane Splitting Legal in Minnesota? (2026 Rules and Limits), California Motorcycle Accident Laws (2026): Deadlines & Helmets, Motorcycle Accident Laws in Washington DC (2026): Helmets
Explore the law
The laws cited above reference these related sections in their own text:
- New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 41 § 41-2-1 — [Death by wrongful act or neglect; liability in damages.] view in our statute record · read at the official source
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Sources and References
- New Mexico Legislature, NMSA 37-1-8 (three-year limitation for personal-injury actions) and NMSA 41-2-2 (three-year wrongful-death limitation)(nmlegis.gov).gov
- CourtListener, Scott v. Rizzo, 96 N.M. 682 (1981) (New Mexico Supreme Court adopting pure comparative negligence)(courtlistener.com)
- New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division, Helmet Law (riders under 18 must wear a helmet; NMSA 66-7-356)(mvd.newmexico.gov).gov
- New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Ride New Mexico, Laws and Rules (helmet, eye-protection, and equipment requirements)(dgf.nm.gov).gov
- New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division, Insurance (minimum 25/50/10 liability requirement; at-fault state, no PIP)(mvd.newmexico.gov).gov
- New Mexico Compilation Commission, NMSA 1978, Section 37-1-8 (three-year limitation for an injury to the person)(nmonesource.com)
- New Mexico Compilation Commission, NMSA 1978, Sections 66-7-355 (eye protection for an operator without an approved fixed windshield) and 66-7-356 (mandatory use of protective helmets; Subsection B contributory-negligence bar)(nmonesource.com)
- Arizona State Legislature, A.R.S. 28-903(F) (two-wheeled motorcycle may pass a stopped vehicle in the same lane and operate between lanes under stated speed conditions)(azleg.gov)
- Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minn. Stat. 169.974, subd. 5 (same-lane passing permitted at not more than 25 miles per hour)(revisor.mn.gov)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.