Active Case
Case
Joseph Herrera v. New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department, D-101-CV-2025-02352
Court
The Honorable Bryan Biedscheid, Division VI

First Judicial District Court, Santa Fe, NM

Counsel for Plaintiff
Law Office of Matthew J. Bouillon Mascareñas LLC
Status
Pending Plaintiff's Supplemental Motion for Leave to Amend His Complaint to Add Class Allegations

Joseph Herrera v. Regulation & Licensing Department is an individual civil action against RLD and its Construction Industries Division, challenging CID's conduct under the due process clause of the New Mexico Constitution and the Inspection of Public Records Act.

In 2014, CID and the Construction Industries Commission created a procedure for appealing code violations with the enactment of 14.5.9.9(B) NMAC. Under this rule, contractors who receive a Code Violation Determination (CVD) may appeal it - first to the CID director within ten days, then if denied, to the Commission within 20 days. Mr. Herrera's complaint alleges that: (1) in addition to other elements of an unfair process, he was not notified of his right to appeal his CVD before CID began an enforcement action against his license; (2) the effect of this omission was to cause him to inadvertently waive appeal rights he never knew he had; and (3) thanks to the newly enacted New Mexico Civil Rights Act, he may now seek relief for constitutional violations directly in state district court, with no requirement to exhaust administrative remedies.

A pending motion seeks leave to amend the complaint to add additional plaintiffs and expand the scope of the case. If granted, the amended complaint would seek relief on behalf of an estimated 1,000 or more New Mexico contractors affected by the deficient forms. As far as the firm is aware, this is the first case of its kind against CID.

Were you affected?

If CID accused you of a code violation at any time in the last ten years and you were not informed of your right to appeal, the issues raised in this case may apply to you. Contact the firm for a free consultation to discuss whether you may be affected.

Schedule a free consultation  or call (505) 317-6953


Case Documents

Pleadings and court filings are posted here as they become available. Newest filings appear first. Click to download.

April 6, 2026
Supplemental Motion for Leave to Amend
Pending briefing. This pleading seeks: (1) to add Bridgette Tena and Carlos Fierro as co-plaintiffs, (2) to state new individual claims for Ms. Tena and Mr. Fierro under the Civil Rights Act and Inspection of Public Records Act, (3) to expand the class definition to include contractors who, like Ms. Tena, did not ever receive a Code Violation Determination form, and (4) to add Ms. Tena as co-class representative.
Pending
February 23, 2026
Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to Amend
PDF
February 6, 2026
Defendant's Response in Opposition to Motion for Leave to Amend
PDF
January 22, 2025
Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File First Amended Verified Class Action Complaint
This pleading seeks leave to amend the complaint to add additional plaintiffs and expand the scope of the case on behalf of similarly situated contractors.
PDF
November 15, 2025
Plaintiff's Notice of Service of Discovery
PDF
November 14, 2025
Defendant's Response to Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
PDF
October 14, 2025
Defendant's Answer to Verified Complaint
PDF
October 14, 2025
Certificate of Service
Defendant's Certificate of Service of Responses to Plaintiff's First Requests for Admission.
PDF
October 9, 2025
Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Count Four (IPRA Violation)
PDF
October 6, 2025
Affidavit of Service
Plaintiff's Affidavit of Service upon Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham per Rule 1-057(B) NMRA.
PDF
September 30, 2025
Plaintiff's Motion to Shorten Time for Responding to Requests for Admission pursuant to Rule 1-036(A) and Request for Expedited Ruling
PDF
September 30, 2025
Plaintiff's Amended Response in Opposition to Motion to Continue Expedited Hearing
PDF
September 30, 2025
Affidavit of Service
Plaintiff's Affidavit of Service upon the Regulation and Licensing Department and the New Mexico Department of Justice.
PDF
September 29, 2025
Hearing on Plaintiff's Application for Preliminary Injunction
Hearing held at 9:30 a.m., First Judicial District Court. The Court denied Plaintiff's requested injunctive relief on ripeness grounds.
Hearing
September 26, 2025
Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Application for Preliminary Injunction
PDF
September 26, 2025
Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Motion to Continue Expedited Hearing
PDF
September 26, 2025
Entry of Appearance
James Grubel, Esq. of Park & Associates on behalf of Defendant Regulation and Licensing Department
PDF
September 26, 2025
Defendant's Motion to Continue Expedited Hearing
PDF
September 19, 2025
Notice of Expedited Hearing
Court's notice setting hearing on Plaintiff's Application for Preliminary Injunction on September 29, 2025 at 9:30 a.m.
PDF
September 18, 2025
Request for Expedited Hearing on TRO
PDF
September 16, 2025
Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
PDF
September 15, 2025
Verified Complaint for Damages and for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Filed on behalf of named Plaintiff Joseph Herrera, individually.
PDF

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I appeal a CID Code Violation Determination in New Mexico?

Yes. Under 14.5.9.9(B) NMAC, contractors who receive a Code Violation Determination from the Construction Industries Division may appeal it to the CID director within ten days. If the director denies the appeal, the contractor may then appeal to the Construction Industries Commission within 20 days. However, Herrera v. RLD alleges that CID failed to inform contractors of these appeal rights on the CVD forms themselves, causing contractors to unknowingly waive their right to appeal.

What is a Code Violation Determination from CID?

A Code Violation Determination is a formal notice from the Construction Industries Division stating that a contractor has violated a provision of the construction code. A CVD can lead to enforcement action against the contractor's license, including fines, suspension, or revocation. Under CID's own regulations, the CVD form is supposed to notify the contractor of the right to appeal the determination.

What happens if CID did not notify me of my right to appeal a code violation?

If CID issued you a Code Violation Determination without informing you of your right to appeal under 14.5.9.9(B) NMAC, you may have unknowingly waived appeal rights you did not know you had. Herrera v. RLD challenges this practice as a violation of due process under the New Mexico Constitution. A pending motion seeks to expand the case to seek relief on behalf of an estimated 1,000 or more contractors affected by deficient CVD forms over the past decade.

How do I know if I am affected by Herrera v. RLD?

If CID accused you of a code violation at any time in the last ten years and you were not informed of your right to appeal, the issues raised in this case may apply to you. Contact the Law Office of Matthew J. Bouillon Mascareñas LLC at (505) 317-6953 for a free consultation to discuss whether you may be affected.

Can I sue CID for violating my due process rights?

Under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, individuals may seek relief for constitutional violations directly in state district court without exhausting administrative remedies. Herrera v. RLD relies on this statute to bring due process claims against CID in the First Judicial District Court in Santa Fe.

What is Herrera v. RLD about?

Herrera v. RLD is an individual civil action against the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department and its Construction Industries Division, challenging CID's failure to provide contractors with required appeal rights on Code Violation Determination forms. The case also raises claims under the Inspection of Public Records Act. A pending motion seeks leave to amend the complaint to expand the case on behalf of similarly situated contractors.


Questions About This Case?

If you're a New Mexico contractor who has been accused of a code violation by CID, schedule a free consultation to discuss your rights.

Schedule Now

Attorney Advertising. The information on this page does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes, as each case must be decided on its own merits. The responsible attorney is Matthew J. Bouillon Mascareñas, Albuquerque, NM. © 2026 Law Office of Matthew J. Bouillon Mascareñas LLC.