2021 New Mexico Statutes
Part B - CONTEST OF VALIDITY OR ENFORCEMENT
Section 40-6A-607 - Contest of registration or enforcement.

A. A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered support order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:
(1) the issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party;
(2) the order was obtained by fraud;
(3) the order has been vacated, suspended or modified by a later order;
(4) the issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal;
(5) there is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy sought;
(6) full or partial payment has been made;
(7) the statute of limitation under Section 40-6A-604 NMSA 1978 precludes enforcement of some or all of the alleged arrearage; or
(8) the alleged controlling order is not the controlling order.
B. If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under Subsection A of this section, a tribunal may stay enforcement of a registered support order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence and issue other appropriate orders. An uncontested portion of the registered support order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this state.
C. If the contesting party does not establish a defense under Subsection A of this section to the validity or enforcement of a registered support order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.
History: Laws 1994, ch. 107, § 607; 2005, ch. 166, § 39; 2011, ch. 159, § 44.
Compiler's notes. — Laws 2016, ch. 61, § 1 repealed Laws 2011, ch. 159, §§ 69 and 70, an applicability clause and contingent effective date, respectively, effective May 18, 2016, thereby making Laws 2011, ch. 159, §§ 1 through 68, effective May 18, 2016. For provisions of Laws 2011, ch. 159, §§ 69 and 70, see compiler's note to 40-6A-100 NMSA 1978.
The 2011 amendment, effective May 18, 2016, made stylistic changes.
The 2005 amendment, effective June 17, 2005, added Subsection (a)(8) to provide the defense that the alleged controlling order is not the controlling order.