New Mexico. Statutory Language

New Mexico Statute 34-49

NEW MEXICO STATUTE

NEW MEXICO ANTITRUST ACT

N.M. S

TAT

.

A

NN

. 1978 §§ 57-1-1 to 57-1-19

§ 57-1-1. Contracts, agreements, combinations or conspiracies in

restraint of trade

Every contract, agreement, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade or

commerce, any part of which trade or commerce is within this state, is unlawful.

§ 57-1-1.1. Short title

Section 57-1-1 through 57-1-15 NMSA 1978 may be cited as the “Antitrust

Act.”

§ 57-1-1.2. Definition

As used in the Antitrust Act, “person” means an individual, corporation, business

trust, partnership, association or any governmental or other legal entity with the

exception of the state, except as used in Subsection B of Section 57-1-3 NMSA 1978,

and the United States.

§ 57-1-2. Monopolies

It is hereby declared to be unlawful for any person to monopolize or attempt to

monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons to monopolize,

trade or commerce, any part of which trade or commerce is within this state.

§ 57-1-3. Contracts for restraint of trade or monopoly void; civil liability

of participants; injunctive relief; purchasers relieved from

payment

A. All contracts and agreements in violation of Section 57-1-1 or 57-1-2 NMSA

1978 shall be void, and any person threatened with injury or injured in his business or

property, directly or indirectly, by a violation of Section 57-1-1 or 57-1-2 NMSA 1978

may bring an action for appropriate injunctive relief, up to threefold the damages

sustained and costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. If the trier of fact finds that the facts

so justify, damages may be awarded in an amount less than that requested, but not less

than the damages actually sustained.

B. The attorney general may bring an action under Subsection A of this section

on behalf of the state, a political subdivision thereof or any public agency.

C. In any action under this section, any defendant, as a partial or complete

defense against a damage claim, may, in order to avoid duplicative liability, be entitled

to prove that the plaintiff purchaser or seller in the chain of manufacture, production, or