Rule 1-052.Nonjury trials; findings and conclusions
Last amended December 31, 2013 · Last verified June 26, 2026
Full Text of Rule 1-052
Rule History
[As amended, effective January 1, 1987; February 1, 2001; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 06-8300-017, effective August 21, 2006; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-032, effective in all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2013.]
Committee Commentary
1. In general.
Prior to the February 1, 2001 revisions, Rule 1-052 NMRA provided procedures which were cumbersome, unnecessarily detailed and confusing. The February 1, 2001 revision simplifies the process of rendering a decision in nonjury trials while preserving the portions of the existing rule which seek to assure that the court’s decision will be clear and correct.
The February 1, 2001 revision eliminates the confusing distinction between evidentiary and ultimate facts. The court is no longer required to mark as “Refused” all proposed findings that are not included in the court’s decision. It requires that the court enter findings and conclusions upon request of a party. Finally, former Paragraph A of Rule 1-052 NMRA, relating to waiver of trial by jury, has been rewritten and is now found in Paragraph D of Rule 1-038 NMRA, jury trial in civil actions.
Section 39-1-1 NMSA 1978, adopted in 1897, provides that a trial court in some cases has continuing jurisdiction over its judgments for thirty (30) days after their entry. See, e.g., Laffoon v. Galles Motor Co., 80 N.M. 1, 450 P.2d 439 (Ct. App. 1969). Rather than have a ten (10)-day time requirement for filing most post-judgment motions but a thirty (30)-day time frame for filing motions under Section 39-1-1 NMSA 1978, the 2013 amendments extend the time for filing all post-trial motions, including Rule 1-052 NMRA motions to amend or add findings and conclusions after entry of judgment, to thirty (30) days from entry of the final judgment. The decision to extend the time to thirty (30) days rather than to limit Section 39-1-1 NMSA 1978 motions to ten (10) days was made because the prior ten (10)-day requirement often left insufficient time for parties to research, formulate, and prepare post-judgment motions. In addition, the choice of thirty (30) days makes it unnecessary to determine whether the provision in Section 39-1-1 NMSA 1978 for extended post-judgment jurisdiction of the district court is consistent with the principle of separation of powers between the legislature and the judiciary. See Rule 1-091 NMRA; Ammerman v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc., 89 N.M. 307, 551 P.2d 1354 (1976). The intent and effect of the 2013 amendment to Rule 1-052(D) NMRA is to expand the time for filing those motions to thirty (30) days from entry of the judgment.
Motions are no longer deemed denied if not ruled upon for thirty (30) days after submission. Rule 1-054.1 NMRA. See the Committee Commentary for 2006 Amendment to Rule 1-054.1 NMRA for additional information. Instead, Rule 1-054.1 NMRA directs district courts to enter an order within sixty (60) days of submission. Id. Normally, the party filing a post-judgment motion has to await entry of an order from the district court ruling on the motion before filing an effective notice of appeal because where a timely Rule 1-052(D) NMRA motion has been filed, the time for filing a notice of appeal runs from the date of entry of an order that expressly disposes of the motion. See Dickens v. Laurel Healthcare, LLC, 2009-NMCA-122, ¶ 4, 147 N.M. 303, 222 P.3d 675 (notice of appeal filed prior to ruling on pending Rule 1-059(E) NMRA motion is premature and time for filing notice of appeal does not begin to run until order is entered resolving Rule 1-059(E) NMRA motion). A party who makes a timely Rule 1-052(D) NMRA motion may thereafter prefer to forgo an express ruling on the motion and, instead, start the appellate process. Appellate Rule 12-201(D)(3) NMRA provides that a Rule 1-052(D) NMRA movant may file a notice of withdrawal of the motion, thus affecting the time for filing a notice of appeal as provided in Rule 12-201(D)(3) NMRA.
Under Rule 12-201(D)(4) NMRA, a timely filed notice of appeal does not divest the district court of jurisdiction to dispose of any timely filed motion under Rules 1-050, 1-052, or 1-059 NMRA, or a Rule 1-060 NMRA motion filed within thirty (30) days after the filing of a judgment. The notice of appeal becomes effective when the last such motion is disposed of expressly by an order of the district court, is automatically denied, or is withdrawn.
2. Findings and conclusions; when required.
The February 1, 2001 revision requires a party to tender findings and conclusions in a timely manner in order to assure that the court will enter findings and conclusions. A party who complies with this requirement by tendering findings and conclusions at an early stage in the proceedings may subsequently waive findings and conclusions pursuant to Paragraph C of this rule.
3. Preservation of error on appeal.
Former Rule 1-052 NMRA lacked clarity as to the proper means for preserving error for appeal concerning the findings and conclusions. Compare former Rule 1-052(F) NMRA with former Rule 1-052(B)(2) NMRA; see Cockrell v. Cockrell, 117 N.M. 321, 871 P.2d 977 (1994). The revision omits reference to “preservation of error” as this is a matter for the appellate rules. See Rules 12-208(E), 12-213(A)(4), and 12-216 NMRA; cf. Martinez v. Martinez, 101 N.M. 88, 93, 678 P.2d 1163, 1168 (1984) (dicta); Blea v. Sandoval, 107 N.M. 554, 556, 761 P.2d 432, 434 (Ct. App. 1988) (dicta).
[As amended by Supreme Court Order No. 13-8300-032, effective in all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2013.]
Plain-English Summary
This rule governs the written basis for a judge’s decision. In a case tried to the court (or with an advisory jury), the court must enter findings of fact and conclusions of law when a party makes a timely request; findings are unnecessary on most motions. A party requests findings by filing its own proposed findings and conclusions no later than ten days after the court announces its decision, and a party who filed requested findings before trial may amend, supplement, or withdraw the request within ten days of the decision.
A party may move within thirty days after entry of judgment to have the court amend its findings or conclusions, make additional ones, and amend the judgment accordingly. As the committee commentary explains, the 2001 revision simplified the process and the 2013 amendment extended the time for these post-judgment motions to thirty days.
Frequently Asked Questions
When must the court make findings of fact and conclusions of law?
In a case tried without a jury (or with an advisory jury), when a party makes a timely request by filing proposed findings and conclusions no later than ten days after the court announces its decision.
Can findings be amended after judgment?
Yes. On a motion filed no later than thirty days after entry of judgment, the court may amend or add findings and conclusions and amend the judgment accordingly.