N.M. R. App. P. 12-305
Committee commentary. - In an effort to provide additional options for producing more readable documents, the 2007 amendments to this rule move the formatting requirements for transcripts and records proper to new Rule 12-305.1 NMRA and otherwise restate the formatting requirements for all other papers filed with the appellate courts. Of particular note are the new minimum type style or typeface requirements set forth in Paragraph D of this rule. For example, except for handwritten papers, all papers filed with the Court must now use a proportionally-spaced or monospaced type style or typeface.
A proportionally-spaced type style or typeface allots a different amount of space to each letter based on the particular size and shape of that letter. Proportional fonts use less space and, therefore, less paper to print. A commonly used proportionally-spaced type style is Times New Roman. A monospaced type style or typeface look like typewritten text because each letter uses the same amount of space on the page regardless of its size or shape. A commonly used monospaced type style is Courier.
If a proportionally-spaced type style or typeface is used, it must include serifs and it must be fourteen (14) point or larger. If a monospaced type style or typeface is used, it may not contain more than ten (10) characters per inch. If the practitioner is not sure whether a particular type style or typeface is proportionally-spaced or monospaced, the rule provides guidance by stating that Times New Roman is a proportionally-spaced type style and Courier is a monospaced type style. The selection of a particular proportionally-spaced or monospaced type style is a matter of personal preference, but the choice must comply with the requirements of Paragraph D of this rule. Moreover, the choice will determine the applicable minimum type-volume limitations set forth in these rules if the practitioner chooses to exceed the traditional page limitations set forth in these rules. See Rule 12-318(F)(3) NMRA and Rule 12-502(D)(3) NMRA.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 07-8300-024, effective November 1, 2007; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 10-8300-001, effective April 12, 2010; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 16-8300-011, effective for all cases pending or filed on or after December 31, 2016.]
.ANNOTATIONS The 2016 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 16-8300-011, effective December 31, 2016, authorized and provided the procedure for the filing of handwritten papers prepared by self-represented, non-attorney litigants, provided the proper caption for extraordinary writs filed under Rule 12-504 NMRA, made stylistic and technical changes, and revised the committee commentary; in Paragraph (A), after "parties or their", deleted "counsel" and added "attorneys"; in Paragraph (B), in the introductory sentence, after "All papers", added "filed by a represented party or an attorney"; in Subparagraph (B)(2), after the number designation, added "computer-generated or", and after "typewritten", deleted "or printed; in Subparagraph (B)(5), after "accordance with", deleted "Paragraph A of", after "Rule 12-302", added "(A) NMRA", and after "filing the paper", deleted the remainder of the sentence; added new Paragraph (C) and redesignated the succeeding paragraphs accordingly; in Paragraph (D), after "handwritten", deleted "documents" and added "papers", after "shall be", added "computer-generated or", and after "typed", deleted "or printed"; in Subparagraph (D)(1), after "Paragraphs", deleted "E and", and after "F", added "and G"; in Paragraph (E), after "Paragraph", deleted "E" and added "F"; in Subparagraph (F)(2), after "Defendant-Appellant", added the remainder of the subparagraph; in Subparagraph (G)(1), after "Supreme Court", deleted pursuant to" and added "under"; in Subparagraph (G)(2), after "Supreme Court", deleted "pursuant to" and added "under"; in Subparagraph (G)(4), after "oral argument", deleted "pursuant to Subparagraph (1) of Paragraph B of Rule 12-214" and added "under Rule 12-319(B)(1)"; and in the committee commentary, in the third paragraph, after "See", deleted "Paragraph F(3) of Rule 12-213" and added "Rule 12-318(F)(3)", after "NMRA and", deleted "Paragraph D(3) of", and after "Rule 12-502", added "(D)(3)". The 2010 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 10-8300-001, effective April 12, 2010, in Paragraph F, added Subparagraph (4). The 2009 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 09-8300-014, effective May 25, 2009, in Paragraph C (1), added "The cover page of a brief, docketing statement, or statement of issues may be eleven (11) point or larger if necessary to fit all information required by Paragraphs E and F of this rule on a single page". The 2005 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 05-8300-018, effective October 11, 2005, added Paragraph D relating to captions in proceedings under the provisions of the Children's Code. The 2000 amendment, effective June 15, 2000, in Paragraph B, changed the widths of the left, right, top and bottom margins to one inch. The 1998 amendment, effective for pleadings due on and after April 1, 1998, inserted "statement of the issues" following "docketing statement" in Paragraph C and Subparagraph C(6). The 1995 amendment, effective September 1, 1995, in Paragraph C, inserted "docketing statement" in the introductory language, added the language beginning "and their status" at the end of Subparagraph (2), deleted former Subparagraph (3) relating to status of the parties and redesignated the remaining subparagraphs accordingly, and substituted "the docketing statement or brief" for "the brief if submitting a brief" in Subparagraph (6). The 1992 amendment, effective for cases filed in the supreme court and court of appeals on or after August 1, 1992, added "and, except for a cover page, shall be typed or printed using pica (10 pitch) type style or a twelve (12) point typeface" to the end of the first sentence in Paragraph B.
For the form of captions in the Children's Court, see Rule 10-107 NMRA. For the captions in pleadings in adoption proceedings, see Sections 32A-5-7 and 32A-5-9 NMSA 1978. Appellate rules do not address footnotes. Murken v. Solv-Ex Corp., 2005-NMCA-137, 138 N.M. 653, 124 P.3d 1192. Footnotes. - A brief violates the rules where the footnotes do not consist of permissible type size and are not double spaced, and because if the footnotes were placed in the text of the brief, it would undoubtedly exceed 35 pages. Murken v. Solv-Ex Corp., 2005-NMCA-137, 138 N.M. 653, 124 P.3d 1192. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. - 4 C.J.S. Appeal and Error §§ 506 et seq., 606.