Worked example: Damages Allocation in New Mexico

Example inputs

Run this scenario in DocketMath using the Damages Allocation calculator.

Below is a worked example of damages allocation in New Mexico using DocketMath’s damages-allocation calculator.

This example is designed for workflow clarity (what you enter and what the tool returns), not to provide legal advice. A real case can turn on claim language, evidence, and procedural posture.

Scenario

A plaintiff sues in New Mexico for a bundle of damages tied to the same overall dispute:

• $12,000 in compensatory damages (labor and invoices)
• $7,500 in compensatory damages (medical expenses)
• $5,000 in alleged “penalty-type” amounts (e.g., statutory-sounding damages pleaded within the broader claim)
• $3,000 in attorney’s fees (incurred to pursue the action)
• $1,200 in costs (filing fees, service, and similar litigation expenses)

Total pleaded damages in the complaint:

• $28,700 ($12,000 + $7,500 + $5,000 + $3,000 + $1,200)

Jurisdiction-aware timing rule (used in this example)

New Mexico’s general statute of limitations (“SOL”) period is 2 years, under:

• N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-1-8

No claim-type-specific sub-rule was found in the provided jurisdiction data for the calculator’s allocation logic. So this example uses the general/default 2-year SOL period for the timing assumption throughout.

Example DocketMath inputs (what you would enter)

Use these inputs in the damages-allocation workflow at /tools/damages-allocation (or the equivalent fields shown in your UI):

1. Jurisdiction: US-NM
2. General SOL period (days): Enter ~730 days if the calculator expects days for a “2 years” input.

   • If your interface expects years instead, enter 2 years directly.
   • (The precise day-count convention should match the tool’s implementation.)
3. Date of accrual (or operative event date): 2024-01-15
4. Filing date: 2026-01-20
5. Damages categories and amounts:

   • Compensatory A: 12,000
   • Compensatory B: 7,500
   • Penalty-type / statutory-sounding: 5,000
   • Attorney’s fees: 3,000
   • Costs: 1,200
6. Allocation method selection (tool option):

   • Choose the method DocketMath provides for allocating within a single action.
   • If the UI asks you to separate time-barred vs. recoverable portions, the calculator will use the SOL period above to determine which portions qualify under this simplified timing assumption.

Example run

Let’s walk through what DocketMath is effectively doing with the example inputs.

Run the Damages Allocation calculator using the example inputs above. Review the breakdown for intermediate steps (segments, adjustments, or rate changes) so you can see how each input moves the output. Save the result for reference and compare it to your actual scenario.

Step 1: Determine whether damages are time-barred under the general SOL

• Accrual date: 2024-01-15
• Filing date: 2026-01-20
• Elapsed time: 2 years + 5 days (based on the simplified timing assumption used for this example)

Because New Mexico’s general SOL is 2 years under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-1-8, this run treats the claim as outside the general SOL window for an accrual on 2024-01-15.

Step 2: Allocate recoverable vs. time-barred amounts by category

In many damages-allocation workflows, the tool groups items so that the recoverability outcome follows the timing eligibility determination.

For this worked example, the output reflects a common practical pattern: once the underlying timing assumption deems the damages portion time-barred, the calculator assigns the pleaded amounts into a time-barred / not recoverable bucket (and it may apply similar logic to fees/costs depending on how the tool categorizes them under the selected method).

Output (illustrative of a calculator run)

Key takeaway from this run

Because the filing date lands 5 days beyond the general 2-year SOL window, the example run yields $0 recoverable and $28,700 allocated to the time-barred / not recoverable bucket.

Sensitivity check

here are a few quick ways to see how changing inputs affects the allocation output, while keeping the structure of the example consistent.

To test sensitivity, change one high-impact input (like the rate, start date, or cap) and rerun the calculation. Compare the outputs side by side so you can see how small input shifts affect the result.

Sensitivity test A: Move filing date just inside the 2-year window

Change only the filing date:

• Accrual date: 2024-01-15 (unchanged)
• Filing date: 2026-01-14 (2 years minus 1 day)

Under the general rule (2 years under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-1-8), this simplified workflow treats the claim as within the SOL window.

Expected allocation pattern:

Sensitivity test B: Shift accrual date later by 30 days

Hold filing date constant (still 2026-01-20) but move accrual:

• Accrual date: 2024-02-14 (shifted +30 days)
• Filing date: 2026-01-20

Under the general SOL assumption, this may again flip the timing outcome depending on the calculator’s internal day-count method.

Sensitivity test C: Keep timing time-barred, but change category amounts

Suppose the pleaded amounts change:

• Penalty-type / statutory-sounding reduced from $5,000 to $1,000
• Everything else unchanged
• Timing remains outside 2 years

In this simplified approach, the timing bucket can still drive the allocation to “recoverable = $0” across categories, but the dollar totals within the time-barred bucket change (because you changed the pleaded numbers).

Related reading

• Damages Allocation Guide for Alabama — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for Alaska — Comparative Fault Rules
• Damages Allocation Guide for American Samoa — Comparative Fault Rules