N.M. Sup. Ct. Order No. S-1-AO-2026-00009

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1

March 5, 2026 2

NO. S-1-AO-2026-00009 3

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPROVAL OF 4

INCOME THRESHOLDS FOR THE USE 5

OF SLIDING FEE SCALES 6

FOR ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE 7

RESOLUTION PROGRAMS 8

ORDER 9

WHEREAS, this Court issued Supreme Court Order No. 18-8500-001, which 10

authorized and directed every judicial district to establish an alternative dispute 11

resolution program in accordance with NMSA 1978, Sections 34-6-44 and -45 12

(2017); 13

WHEREAS, under Section 34-6-45, the costs paid by parties who participate 14

in an alternative dispute resolution program shall be pursuant to a Supreme Court 15

approved sliding fee scale that is based on ability to pay; 16

WHEREAS, Supreme Court Order No. 18-8500-001 adopted a sliding fee 17

scale using uniform, statewide income thresholds, based on federal poverty 18

guidelines, but that allowed individual judicial districts to set rates for alternative 19

dispute resolution program services that would assure the continuity and quality of 20

their programs in light of the circumstances and conditions in each judicial district, 21

Filed

Supreme Court of New Mexico

3/5/2026 10:47 AM

Office of the Clerk

which would then be reduced by a uniform percentage depending on the income 1

level of the party paying the fee; 2

WHEREAS, Supreme Court Order No. 18-8500-001 required that the income 3

thresholds upon which the sliding fee scales are based be updated once every five 4

(5) years in light of the published federal poverty guidelines in effect at that time; 5

and 6

WHEREAS, the Court having considered the foregoing and being sufficiently 7

advised, Chief Justice David K. Thomson, Justice Michael E. Vigil, Justice C. 8

Shannon Bacon, Justice Julie J. Vargas, and Justice Briana H. Zamora concurring; 9

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that the income thresholds set forth 10

in Supreme Court Order No. 18- 8500-001 ar e hereby WITHDRAWN and 11

REPLACED by the following income thresholds, which shall be used for all sliding 12

fee scales submitted for this Court’s review and approval under NMSA 1978, 13

Section 34-6-45(B) (2017): 14

1. Any party with gross income above $79,800 shall pay one hundred 15

percent (100%) of the fee charged by a judicial district for 16

alternative dispute resolution program services; 17

2. Any party with gross income from $79,800 to $63,841 shall pay 18

eighty percent (80%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 19

alternative dispute resolution program services; 20

3. Any party with gross income from $63,840 to $55,861 shall pay 1

sixty percent (60%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 2

alternative dispute resolution program services; 3

4. Any party with gross income from $55,860 to $47,881 shall pay fifty 4

percent (50%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 5

alternative dispute resolution program services; 6

5. Any party with gross income from $47,880 to $31,921 shall pay 7

forty percent (40%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 8

alternative dispute resolution program services; 9

6. Any party with gross income from $31,920 to $23,941 shall pay 10

thirty percent (30%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 11

alternative dispute resolution program services; 12

7. Any party with gross income from $23,940 to $19,153 shall pay 13

twenty percent (20%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for 14

alternative dispute resolution program services; 15

8. Any party with gross income of $19,152 or less shall pay ten percent 16

(10%) of the full fee charged by a judicial district for alternative 17

dispute resolution program services; 18

9. For families of five (5) and above, the party shall receive an 19

additional ten percent (10%) discount on the full fee charged by a 20

judicial district for alternative dispute resolution program services, 21

provided that no party shall pay less than ten percent (10%) of the 22

full fee charged by a judicial district for alternative dispute 23

resolution program services unless otherwise ordered by t he judge; 24

and 25

10. The income thresholds upon which the sliding fee scales are based 26

shall be updated in 2031, in light of the published federal poverty 27

guidelines in effect at that time, and shall be updated once every five 28

(5) years thereafter; 29

Pa

ge 4 of 4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a judicial district’s revised sliding fee scale 1

for alternative dispute resolution program services shall be submitted to this Court 2

for review and approval, provided that any judicial district may elect to operate a 3

court-established alternative dispute resolution program without charging fees for 4

the services its program provides; 5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any judicial district that charges fees for 6

domestic relations mediation, safe exchange, and supervised visitation services 7

under the Domestic Relations Mediation Act shall, in consultation and coordination 8

with the Administrative Office of the Courts, submit revised sliding fee scales for 9

this Court’s review and approval that incorporate the income thresholds set forth in 10

this order and that otherwise comply with the requirements in Rule 1-125(I) NMRA 11

and the Domestic Relations Mediation Act; and 12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the remaining provisions of Supreme Court 13

Order No. 18-8500-001 shall remain in effect. 14

IT IS SO ORDERED. 15

WITNESS, the Honorable David K. Thomson, Chief 16

Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico, 17

and the seal of said Court this 5th day of March, 2026. 18