Carter v. New Mexico Human Services Department

2 Citing cases

  1. Princeton Place v. N.M. Human Servs. Dep't

    2018 NMCA 36 (N.M. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 4 times

    While the appellate courts will accord some deference to an agency's interpretation of law, this Court "may always substitute its interpretation of the law for that of the agency's because it is the function of the courts to interpret the law." Perez , 2015-NMCA-008, ¶ 9, 345 P.3d 330 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Carter v. N.M. Human Servs. Dep't , 2009-NMCA-063, ¶ 8, 146 N.M. 422, 211 P.3d 219. {28} We begin by addressing the issue raised by the Amicus concerning whether the PASARR Form and instructions constitute rules, such that the failure to follow them constitutes a violation of law. Pursuant to the New Mexico Administrative Procedures Act, "[p]rior to the adoption, amendment or repeal of any rule," an agency shall: (1) "publish notice of its proposed action in the manner specified by law, or ... as will reasonably give public notice to interested persons"; (2) "notify any person specified by law, and, in addition, any person or group filing [a] written request," of the time and place of any public hearing on the matter, an adequate description of the substance of the proposed action, and of any additional matter required by law concerning the statutory authority of the proposed rule; and (3) "afford all interested persons reasonable opportunity to submit data, views or arguments orally or in writing and examine witnesses, unless otherwise provided by law."

  2. Calles v. N.M. Human Servs. Dep't

    NO. 32,175 (N.M. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2012)

    14(C)(2) NMAC. "Although we accord deference to an agency's interpretation of its own statutes, we will, nevertheless, reverse an agency determination in order to correct a misapplication of the law." Carter v. N.M. Human Servs. Dep't, 2009-NMCA-063, ¶ 8, 146 N.M. 422, 211 P.3d 219 (internal citations omitted). "HSD has the burden of proving the basis to support its proposed action by a preponderance of the evidence.