A. If the court, as a matter of law, finds that any provision of a rental agreement was inequitable when made, the court may limit the application of such inequitable provisions to avoid an inequitable result.
B. If inequitability is put into issue by a party to the rental agreement, the parties to the rental agreement shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to the setting, purpose and effect of the rental agreement, or settlement, to aid the court in making determination.
History: 1953 Comp., § 70-7-12, enacted by Laws 1975, ch. 38, § 12.
ANNOTATIONSPurpose of section. — This section modifies common-law principles by allowing the court to make a determination of the underlying fairness of the rental agreement when made and allowing selective enforcement of the contract to bring about an equitable result. Ramirez-Eames v. Hover, 1989-NMSC-038, 108 N.M. 520, 775 P.2d 722.
Review on appeal. — The determination of whether a rental agreement is inequitable should not be made de novo on review. Appellate courts should not be de novo courts of equity in landlord-tenant disputes. Ramirez-Eames v. Hover, 1989-NMSC-038, 108 N.M. 520, 775 P.2d 722.
Law reviews. — For survey, "The Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act," see 6 N.M.L. Rev. 293 (1976).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Application of usury laws to transactions characterized as "leases," 94 A.L.R.3d 640.