Nothing in the Collection Agency Regulatory Act [61-18A-1 NMSA 1978] shall be construed to prevent collection agencies from taking assignments of claims in their own name as real parties in interest for the purpose of billing and collection and bringing suit in their own names thereon, provided that no suit authorized by this section may be instituted on behalf of a collection agency in any court unless the collection agency appears by a duly authorized and licensed attorney-at-law. In such suit, the court may, in its discretion, authorize payment of reasonable attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party.
History: Laws 1987, ch. 252, § 26.
Pro forma assignments. — This section does not authorize the practice of taking the assignment of debts from an underlying creditor on a contingency fee basis and the filing of a suit by the collection agency's own attorneys in the collection agency's own name. Kolker v. Duke City Collection Agency, 750 F. Supp. 468 (D.N.M. 1990).
Practice of law not authorized. — This section cannot authorize collection agencies to practice law by bringing suits on nominally assigned claims in state court, since the regulation of the practice of law is an exclusive prerogative of the New Mexico Supreme Court. Martinez v. Albuquerque Collection Servs., Inc., 867 F. Supp. 1495 (D.N.M. 1994).