Bird v. Lankford (1993)
Decided: September 29, 1993. Full primary opinion retrieved on an unofficial reporter host; reader-only versus raw-body provenance is identified in the New Mexico source catalog. bird
Source note (2026-10-18):
- source replaced 2026-10-18: static.case.law robots-disallowed; official copy at NM OneSource (New Mexico Compilation Commission, official) (replaces
https://static.case.law/nm/116/cases/0408-01.json; retrieval dates stated elsewhere on this page refer to the earlier copy).
Facts
Bird orally rented storage space. The operator obtained a magistrate judgment for unpaid rent, moved the goods to an auctioneer, gave notice to Bird’s attorney and published twice, then sold without the ordinary sheriff execution. Bird sued for conversion and deprivation of due process after a restraining order was dissolved. bird
Holding and disposition
The oral arrangement created neither the written-lease landlord lien nor the written-agreement self-service-storage lien. The creditor had to enforce its judgment by execution. The court remanded conversion for the fairness/substantial-compliance inquiry; it did not automatically declare the auction valid or void. Dismissal of the due-process claim was affirmed on the argument presented, not through a comprehensive constitutional approval of the sale. bird
Reasoning and complete remedial treatment
The personalty execution provisions serve law-enforcement assistance and a fair public sale. Substantial compliance/fairness rather than exacting formality controlled the conversion inquiry in these circumstances. A departure from a statutory procedure does not itself establish a constitutional violation, and the constitutional argument was insufficiently developed to establish reversible error. bird
Practical impact and limits
The opinion’s historical observation about lack of statutory debtor sale notice cannot be read as a current exemption-notice waiver. Current Rule1-065.1 requires natural-person notice/claim forms at least ten days before seizure and supplies claim/dispute/hearing timelines. The case does not authorize a storage operator to sell on an oral agreement merely because rent is owed, and remand is not an automatic conversion-damages award. bird
Treatment and currentness boundary
The retained official §48-11-3 annotations cite the written-agreement holding. The actual October31,2025 amended Rule1-065.1, effective December31,2025, is an independently operative procedural protection, not a purported judicial overruling of Bird. No exhaustive citator search or comprehensive still-good-law certificate is claimed. bird rule25
Applies in →
new-mexico · court-ordered-administrative-and-creditor-sales
Disclaimer. This page is legal information, not legal advice. It summarizes a court decision that may have been limited or distinguished by later authority. Nothing here creates an attorney-client relationship. Read the full opinion and consult a licensed attorney before acting.