Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports
if they are used for other purposes.
Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).
Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and
attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR SJC
DATE TYPED 03/02/05 HB
SHORT TITLE Unfair Trade Practice Mediation Requirements
SB 118/SJCS
ANALYST McSherry/Ford
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring
or Non-Rec
Fund
Affected
FY05
FY06
FY05
FY06
Minimal --
See Narrative
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates
HB360/HJCS
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Responses Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
The Senate Judiciary Committee substitute for Senate Bill 118 requires the parties in a court ac-
tion for a private remedy pursuant to the Unfair Practices Act to enter into early mediation at the
request of one of the parties. The mediation requirement does not apply to actions seeking
injunctive relief.
The bill requires that a party to a court action may request mediation within 30 days of the ser-
vice of summons and complaint. If the request is made, the parties shall choose a mutually ac-
ceptable mediator and enter into mediation within 60 days of the appointment of the mediator. If
the parties cannot agree on a mediator, the court shall appoint one.
The costs of the mediator are capped at $50 for the person bringing the suit if the parties enter
early mediation within 60 days of the appointment of the mediator. The remainder of the costs
for mediation shall be borne by the other party.
pg_0002
Senate Bill 118/SJCS -- Page 2
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The bill requires the courts to appoint a mediator in cases where the parties cannot agree on an
acceptable mediator, which may result in minimal cost increases for the courts. Some courts
have existing mediation or arbitration programs and may choose to use their existing programs to
implement the bill. Courts without an existing program would most likely appoint a private
mediator.
The bill may also result in savings to the courts, which could off-set cost increases. To the extent
that parties resolve their disputes in early mediation, the costs of trials would be avoided.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
The Senate Judiciary Committee substitute for Senate Bill 118 duplicates the House Judiciary
Committee substitute for House Bill 360.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
Identifying an appropriate mediator may be a challenge in some areas of the state. If parties are
unable to agree on a mutually acceptable mediator, the court shall appoint one. Each court will
have to determine how to implement this requirement given the various resources available in
their areas. Courts that have existing mediation programs in place may simply direct the parties
to participate in those services. Courts without a program may choose to appoint a private me-
diator. In some areas of the state, it may be somewhat challenging to find a neutral mediator to
appoint.
EF/lg