NM Stat § 42-4-7 (2021)
2021 New Mexico Statutes|Chapter 42 - Actions and Proceedings Relating to Property|Article 4 - Ejectment and Recovery of Real Property|Section 42-4-7 - [Ultimate facts authorizing recovery.]

It shall be sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to recover, to show that at the time of the commencement of the action the defendant was in possession of the premises claimed, and that the plaintiff had a right to the possession thereof. History: C.L. 1897, § 2685 (255), added by Laws 1907, ch. 107, § 1 (255); Code 1915, § 4365; C.S. 1929, § 105-1806; 1941 Comp., § 25-807; 1953 Comp., § 22-8-7. ANNOTATIONSBracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and is not part of the law. Right of possession deemed foundation of ejectment action. — The very foundation of the right to maintain an action of ejectment, both at common law and under the statutory law of New Mexico, is the plaintiff 's right to the possession of the premises. Burke v. Permian Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, 1981-NMSC-001, 95 N.M. 314, 621 P.2d 1119. Right to possession. — In ejectment, the parties' rights to possession are primarily in issue. Pacheco v. Martinez, 1981-NMCA-116, 97 N.M. 37, 636 P.2d 308. Right to possession at time of filing complaint essential. — Plaintiff's failure to give his month-to-month tenant valid 30-days' notice meant that plaintiff's complaint in ejectment was invalid, because he did not have the right to possession; his action in ejectment was, therefore, premature. Dickens v. Hall, 1986-NMSC-029, 104 N.M. 173, 718 P.2d 683. Defective deed alone will not support summary determination. — Where plaintiffs in ejectment action have shown that the deed upon which defendants' title is asserted is fatally defective, this alone will not support a summary determination of the cause where there are indications external to the deed which might support defendants' position. Jemez Props., Inc. v. Lucero, 1979-NMCA-162, 94 N.M. 181, 608 P.2d 157, cert. denied, 94 N.M. 628, 614 P.2d 545 (1980). Effect of conflicting calls in deed, in boundary line dispute. — In an action instituted by appellee who filed a complaint in the nature of ejectment in a boundary line dispute, when there are conflicting calls in a deed - one for distance, the other for an adjoining tract of a named person - the latter prevails only if the person named actually owns the adjoining tract. Olivas v. Garcia, 1958-NMSC-105, 64 N.M. 419, 329 P.2d 435. No directed verdict where conflict in evidence as to possession. — Where neither party to an action in ejectment shows legal title in himself, and the prior possession of the plaintiff and those through whom he claims as a matter upon which there is a conflict in the evidence, the court cannot properly direct a verdict, but the case should be submitted to the jury. Romero v. Herrera, 1921-NMSC-096, 27 N.M. 559, 203 P. 243. Hold-over tenant holds on same terms as in original lease. — A tenant holding over after expiration of a lease without the landlord's assent holds on the same terms as those of the original lease, including all covenants thereof, unless made inapplicable by changed conditions. Burke v. Permian Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, 1981-NMSC-001, 95 N.M. 314, 621 P.2d 1119. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 25 Am. Jur. 2d Ejectment §§ 19, 20, 21. Mesne profits, right to, as compensation for crops grown by one wrongfully in possession, 39 A.L.R. 962, 57 A.L.R. 584. Remainderman, right as against, to allowance under statute for improvements made during continuance of life estate by one in possession under mistaken claim of title to the fee, 89 A.L.R. 635. Instructions in ejectment on rule that plaintiff must recover on strength of own title, 159 A.L.R. 646. Rule that plaintiff in real action may recover on proof of better title from common source as applicable where plaintiff evidence shows that the common-source title is bad, 5 A.L.R.3d 375. 28A C.J.S. Ejectment § 14 et seq.