Home › New Mexico › Rules of Professional Conduct › Rule 16-302

Court Rules Network • courtrules.net

NMRA 16-302

Not legal advice. Verify against official sources before relying on this text in any legal matter.

Rule 16-302 Expediting litigation.

ARTICLE 3 Advocate

← Previous Rule 16-301: Meritorious claims and contentions. Next → Rule 16-303: Candor toward the tribunal.

Rule Text

A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.

Amendment history: Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 08-8300-029, effective November 3, 2008.

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

Lawyers are expected to keep cases moving instead of dragging them out. This means not using delay as a tactic just to wear down the other side, run up costs, or cause unnecessary stress. A lawyer should handle deadlines, filings, and scheduling in a way that keeps the case progressing at a fair pace.

This does not mean a lawyer has to rush or skip steps that actually help their client's case. If more time is genuinely needed to prepare, gather evidence, or respond properly, that is still allowed. The rule is aimed at stopping lawyers from stalling for no good reason, especially when delay is used as a strategy to pressure or frustrate the other party.

For someone involved in a lawsuit, this rule offers some protection against the other side's lawyer using stalling tactics unfairly. If a case seems to be moving slower than it should for no real reason, this rule is one of the standards a lawyer is supposed to follow to keep things fair and efficient.

Committee Notes

Committee commentary. —

Dilatory practices bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Although there will be occasions when a lawyer may properly seek a postponement for personal reasons, it is not proper for a lawyer to routinely fail to expedite litigation solely for the convenience of the advocates. Nor will a failure to expedite be reasonable if done for the purpose of frustrating an opposing party’s attempt to obtain rightful redress or repose. It is not a justification that similar conduct is often tolerated by the bench and bar. The question is whether a competent lawyer acting in good faith would regard the course of action as having some substantial purpose other than delay. Realizing financial or other benefit from otherwise improper delay in litigation is not a legitimate interest of the client.

← Previous Rule 16-301: Meritorious claims and contentions. Next → Rule 16-303: Candor toward the tribunal.