The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDAA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. A critical aspect of this law is how it addresses the control and disposition of digital assets held by a custodian. NMSA § 45-12-107 specifically outlines the duties of a custodian when presented with a valid request for disclosure of digital assets. The statute mandates that a custodian must provide a user’s digital assets to the user’s personal representative or any other person entitled to access those assets under the user’s will, trust, or other applicable law. This disclosure must be made in accordance with the terms of service of the online service and any applicable federal or state law. The NMUDAA does not require a court order for the custodian to disclose digital assets to the personal representative, provided the request is accompanied by proper documentation, such as a death certificate and proof of the requester’s authority. The law prioritizes the user’s intent and the efficient administration of their estate by streamlining access to digital assets. Therefore, a custodian’s obligation is to facilitate this access, not to create additional procedural hurdles beyond what is legally mandated for proving authority and identity.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law, codified in Chapter 46A, Article 10 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. Specifically, NMSA § 46A-10-107 addresses the rights of a user’s representative to access the user’s digital assets. This statute distinguishes between the rights of a representative to access the content of digital communications and the rights to access other digital assets. For digital assets other than electronic mail, instant messages, or stored voice messages, the law provides that a user’s representative may access the digital asset if the user has granted the representative access in an online tool, a will, a trust, or other legally binding document. If no such grant exists, the representative’s access is limited to what is otherwise provided by law. In this scenario, the decedent, Elias Thorne, explicitly granted his estate’s personal representative access to all his digital assets through his will. This grant is a legally binding document as contemplated by NMSA § 46A-10-107(b)(2). Therefore, the personal representative has the legal authority to access Elias Thorne’s cryptocurrency wallet, which constitutes a digital asset under the New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law. The law’s intent is to allow for the orderly transfer of digital property, similar to tangible property, when properly authorized.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), codified in Chapter 46, Article 10 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a user’s death or incapacity. A critical aspect of this law is how it defines and handles a digital asset custodian’s obligations. The NM UDAA distinguishes between the content of electronic communications and other digital assets. For electronic communications, such as emails or instant messages, the custodian may only disclose the content to a designated legal representative or, in the absence of such designation, to the user’s next of kin if the court finds it is in the best interest of the user. However, for other digital assets, like digital currency or digital photographs, the custodian’s duty is to provide access to the authorized representative. The act specifies that a custodian can charge a reasonable fee for services rendered in providing access to or disclosing digital assets. This fee structure is not explicitly capped by a percentage of the asset’s value but rather by what is deemed “reasonable” for the services performed, reflecting the operational costs and complexities involved in managing and transferring digital assets. Therefore, the custodian’s ability to charge a fee is tied to the actual work performed in fulfilling the legal representative’s request.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated, addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death or incapacitation. Specifically, Section 45-12-106 of the NM UDAA outlines the procedures for custodians to grant access to digital assets. This section establishes a hierarchy of authority, prioritizing a court order, a principal’s agent under a valid power of attorney, or a designated beneficiary or successor in title. The act distinguishes between “digital assets” and “electronic records.” A digital asset is defined as an electronic record in which the user has a right of ownership and which the user has a right to create, collect, store, receive, or transmit. The NM UDAA aims to provide a framework for managing digital assets in a manner consistent with the user’s intent and applicable legal principles, ensuring that digital assets are not lost or inaccessible due to the owner’s death or incapacitation. The specific language of the statute, particularly regarding the scope of an agent’s authority and the notification requirements for custodians, is crucial for proper estate planning and administration involving digital assets in New Mexico. The act allows for specific instructions within a digital asset will or trust to override general provisions.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law, specifically codified in Chapter 45 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA 1978), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. When a user dies, the law provides a framework for their personal representative or designated agent to access and manage these assets. The law distinguishes between content and a communication record. Content refers to the digital assets themselves, such as emails, digital photographs, or documents stored online. A communication record, on the other hand, encompasses information related to the transmission of electronic communications, like sender and recipient information, timestamps, and IP addresses. NMSA 1978 § 45-1-101 defines “digital asset” broadly to include electronic records that an individual has a right or interest in. NMSA 1978 § 45-1-301 outlines the general principles for accessing digital assets. Crucially, NMSA 1978 § 45-1-305 specifically addresses the disclosure of communication records. This section states that a fiduciary may not disclose a communication record to a beneficiary unless the user has expressly consented to such disclosure in a record or an account agreement. This consent requirement is paramount for protecting the privacy of digital communications. Therefore, if the deceased user did not provide explicit consent for the disclosure of their email communication records, the personal representative cannot legally access or share these records with the beneficiaries under New Mexico law. The law prioritizes the user’s intent regarding privacy of their digital communications.

The New Mexico Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (NM UETA), codified at NMSA 1978, Chapter 71, Article 12, governs the legal recognition of electronic records and signatures. Specifically, Section 71-12-6 addresses the validity of electronic signatures. This section states that if a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law. Furthermore, Section 71-12-7 clarifies that an electronic record satisfies a law requiring a record to be in writing if it is accessible for subsequent reference. The core principle is that electronic transactions are to be given the same legal effect as paper-based transactions. Therefore, when a digital asset is transferred, and the transfer requires a signature, an electronic signature, as defined and validated by NM UETA, is legally sufficient. The scenario describes a blockchain-based transfer of a digital asset, which inherently involves electronic records and signatures. The New Mexico Digital Asset Act (NMSA 1978, Chapter 24, Article 22) further clarifies that digital assets are property and their transfer is subject to applicable laws. The question tests the understanding that NM UETA provides the foundational legal framework for the validity of electronic signatures in such transactions within New Mexico. The other options present incorrect interpretations of electronic transaction law or are irrelevant to the specific legal requirements for signature validity in New Mexico. For instance, requiring a physical signature for a digital asset transfer would negate the purpose of electronic transactions and digital assets. While some specific types of transactions might have additional requirements, the general validity of electronic signatures for transfers is established by NM UETA.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), enacted in 2017, addresses the disposition of digital assets upon a user’s death or incapacitation. A key aspect of this law, mirroring provisions in many other states that have adopted variations of the Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (UUPADAA), is the distinction between a digital asset and an account. Under NMUDATA, a digital asset is defined as an electronic record that the user has a right to: (i) create, collect, store, manage, or transmit; or (ii) a legal right or interest in. An account is defined as a record established by a digital asset service provider on behalf of a user for the purpose of holding, storing, or transmitting digital assets. Crucially, the Act establishes a hierarchy of control over digital assets. A user can grant access through an online tool provided by the digital asset service provider, or by including specific provisions in a will or trust. In the absence of such explicit instructions, the Act provides default rules. For a digital asset that is a record of the user’s communications, access is generally limited to the user’s representative, and only if the user has not opted out. For other digital assets, such as digital content or digital property, the user’s representative typically has access. The question revolves around the legal classification of a digital asset versus an account in the context of estate planning under New Mexico law. A digital asset is the actual content or data the user possesses or controls, whereas an account is the service or platform that facilitates the storage or transmission of that digital asset. Therefore, a cryptocurrency wallet, which holds the private keys to digital currency, is considered the digital asset itself, while the online platform or exchange where the wallet might be hosted or managed, or the service provider that facilitates transactions, would be the account. The question tests the understanding of this fundamental distinction as it pertains to fiduciary access and estate administration in New Mexico.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law, codified in Chapter 45, Article 13 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA 1978), specifically addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death or incapacitation. A key aspect of this law, mirroring trends in digital estate planning across the United States, is the distinction between the content of a digital asset and the underlying service or account. When a user’s terms of service agreement with a digital service provider conflicts with the user’s directive regarding their digital assets, the law generally prioritizes the terms of service unless specific exceptions apply. In New Mexico, for digital assets that are not directly accessible by the user through a specific interface (like cloud storage or online accounts), the law distinguishes between the right to access the digital asset itself and the right to access the underlying account or service. The law allows a user to grant a specific right of access to a digital asset to a designated person. However, the law also recognizes that the provider of the service may have its own terms of service that govern access to accounts. NMSA 1978, § 45-13-109(B) states that the law does not override terms of service that prohibit disclosure of digital assets. This means that if the terms of service for a platform explicitly prohibit the disclosure of a user’s digital assets to a third party, even a designated fiduciary, that prohibition generally stands. The law aims to balance the user’s intent with the contractual obligations between the user and the service provider. Therefore, a fiduciary’s right to access digital assets is subject to the terms of service of the online platform.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated, governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. A key aspect of this act is the process by which a user’s digital assets are handled by an online custodian. The act distinguishes between digital assets that are recordable or transferable and those that are not. For digital assets that are not recordable or transferable, such as certain personal communications or content that the user did not have the right to transfer, the custodian is generally permitted to terminate the account and delete the content. This is in contrast to digital assets that are recordable or transferable, like digital currency or digital securities, where the user’s intent and the terms of service of the custodian will dictate the transferability. The act provides a framework for custodians to follow, balancing the user’s privacy with the need to administer their digital estate. The specific provisions regarding the termination of accounts for non-transferable digital assets are designed to prevent custodians from being burdened with the perpetual storage of data that has no inherent transfer value and for which the user’s rights do not extend to posthumous transfer. The law aims to provide clarity for both users and custodians in the evolving landscape of digital property.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12A of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated, governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. Specifically, Section 45-12A-109 addresses the ability of a custodian to provide access to a digital asset of a deceased user. This section outlines that a custodian must provide a digital asset to a beneficiary designated in a valid will or trust, or if no such designation exists, to a person authorized by other law to administer the user’s estate. The law requires the custodian to have received a “legal record” of the user’s death, which typically includes a death certificate. Furthermore, the custodian may require a copy of the user’s will or trust instrument and any other documentation reasonably necessary to establish the legal authority of the person requesting access. The act aims to balance the user’s privacy interests with the need for authorized access to digital assets after death. It empowers custodians to establish reasonable procedures for verifying requests, ensuring that access is granted only to those with a legal right to it, thereby preventing unauthorized disclosure or transfer of sensitive digital information. The core principle is to provide a framework for orderly succession of digital assets, akin to traditional tangible property, while respecting the unique nature of digital information and the terms of service agreements with custodians.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), specifically NMSA 1978 § 45-1-101 et seq., governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. When a user of a service provider dies, the NM UDAA outlines the process for granting access to their digital assets. The Act distinguishes between different types of digital assets and the terms of service agreements. For digital assets that are not consumer-facing, such as those held in a business account or for professional purposes, the service provider is generally permitted to grant access to the user’s representative if the terms of service explicitly allow it. However, the Act also emphasizes that the service provider’s terms of service are paramount, provided they do not violate other laws or public policy. In this scenario, the terms of service explicitly permit access for a representative in the event of the user’s death. Therefore, the service provider is legally obligated to grant access to the digital assets held in Elara’s business account to her designated executor. This aligns with the principle that the explicit terms of service, when lawful, dictate the handling of digital assets by the service provider.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death or incapacitation. Specifically, NMSA 45-12-110 outlines the procedure for a fiduciary to access a user’s digital assets. This section distinguishes between a “custodian” and a “user.” A custodian is defined as a person who holds, possesses, or controls a digital asset on behalf of another person. A user is a person who has a legal right to the digital asset. When a user dies or becomes incapacitated, their fiduciary, such as an executor or trustee, can request access to the user’s digital assets from the custodian. NMSA 45-12-110(b) states that a fiduciary can obtain access by providing the custodian with a valid, recordable, and authenticated copy of the user’s death certificate or other record of termination of the user’s rights, and proof of the fiduciary’s authority. This proof of authority typically includes a court order, letters testamentary, letters of administration, or a trust instrument. The custodian must then provide the fiduciary with access to the digital assets. The law aims to balance the user’s privacy with the fiduciary’s need to manage the deceased’s digital estate, including digital assets like cryptocurrency, online accounts, and digital photographs. The custodian has a duty to comply with a valid request, but is also protected from liability if they reasonably rely on the provided documentation. The critical element for a fiduciary to gain access is the proper documentation proving both the user’s death or incapacitation and the fiduciary’s legal authority to act on behalf of the user’s estate.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), codified in NMSA 1978, Chapter 46, Article 10, addresses the rights and responsibilities surrounding digital assets upon a user’s death or incapacity. A crucial aspect of this act is the distinction between the “content” of a digital asset and the “account” in which it is held. The NM UDAA grants a fiduciary, such as an executor or administrator of an estate, the authority to access, manage, and distribute digital assets. However, the scope of this authority is often debated and depends on the specific terms of service of the online platform and the user’s explicit instructions. When a user’s digital assets are stored on a platform that is governed by a terms of service agreement that prohibits disclosure of user data to third parties, even with a court order, the fiduciary’s ability to directly access or control those assets can be significantly curtailed. The NM UDAA, while empowering fiduciaries, does not override all third-party terms of service agreements. Instead, it provides a framework for how fiduciaries can request access. If a platform’s terms of service explicitly forbid disclosure, and the platform chooses to adhere strictly to these terms, the fiduciary may be unable to gain direct access to the digital asset’s content. In such a scenario, the fiduciary’s primary recourse is to follow the NM UDAA’s procedural requirements for requesting access. If the platform denies the request based on its terms of service, and the NM UDAA does not explicitly mandate override of such terms in all instances, the fiduciary’s ability to fulfill their duties concerning that specific digital asset may be limited by the platform’s policy. The act emphasizes a balance between the user’s privacy, the fiduciary’s responsibilities, and the service provider’s terms.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA 1978), specifically addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. Section 45-1-201(14) of the Act defines a “digital asset” broadly to include electronic records that are not connected to a computer, such as digital media files, digital collectibles, and virtual currency, and also electronic records that are connected to a computer, such as data stored on a personal computer or cloud storage. This definition is crucial because it distinguishes between different types of digital assets and the legal frameworks that might apply. The Act then outlines how a user’s rights in digital assets can be managed, particularly after their death. Section 45-1-302 NMSA 1978, titled “Control of Digital Assets,” establishes that a user can grant a fiduciary, such as a personal representative or trustee, control over their digital assets. This control can be granted through an online tool, a will, a trust, or another record. The Act emphasizes that the terms of service of a digital asset custodian are subject to the user’s control directive. If a user has not provided a control directive, or if the directive is insufficient, the Act provides default rules. Specifically, if a user dies or becomes incapacitated, the personal representative of the user’s estate, or a person authorized to manage the user’s property, can request access to the user’s digital assets from the custodian. The custodian must comply with such a request unless it is prohibited by federal law or a specific court order. This provision is key to understanding how digital assets are handled in estate administration in New Mexico.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated, addresses the rights and duties of custodians of digital assets and the rights of beneficiaries to access these assets upon the user’s death. Specifically, Section 45-12-108 of the NM UDAA outlines the procedures for a fiduciary to request access to a user’s digital assets. This section establishes that a fiduciary, such as an executor or trustee, can request access by providing the custodian with a validated copy of the user’s death certificate and a copy of the court order or other document that establishes the fiduciary’s authority. The custodian is then permitted to grant access to the digital assets. The law emphasizes that a custodian may not deny a fiduciary’s request solely because the request is made by a fiduciary. Furthermore, the NM UDAA provides a framework for custodians to respond to these requests, typically within a specified timeframe, and outlines the scope of access granted, which is generally limited to what is necessary to administer the user’s estate or trust. It is crucial to understand that the NM UDAA balances the user’s privacy interests with the need for fiduciaries to manage digital assets after death, establishing clear protocols for this process. The law’s intent is to provide a legal mechanism for the orderly transfer and management of digital assets, recognizing their increasing importance in modern estates.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), enacted in 2017 and codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and duties of custodians of digital assets and the rights of beneficiaries to access those assets. The Act provides a framework for managing digital assets upon the death or incapacity of the user. Specifically, NMSA § 45-12-109 addresses the rights of a user’s representative to access the user’s digital assets. This section outlines that a representative, such as an executor or trustee, can request access to the digital assets of a deceased user. However, the custodian of the digital asset can deny access if the user’s terms of service prohibit disclosure to a representative. The Act also specifies that a user can grant access through an online tool or by providing a separate written authorization to the custodian. The core principle is balancing the user’s intent and privacy with the need for a representative to manage the user’s digital estate. In the scenario presented, Mr. Abernathy’s will is a valid legal document that, under general probate law, designates his daughter as his executor. However, the specific provisions of NMUDATA regarding digital assets, particularly the terms of service agreements with digital asset custodians, take precedence for accessing those specific assets. If the terms of service for “CloudVault” explicitly prohibit disclosure of account contents to a representative, even with a court order or a will, the custodian can legally deny access. The existence of a will is a general grant of authority for estate administration, but it does not automatically override specific contractual terms governing digital asset access, unless those terms are themselves deemed invalid or unconscionable under broader contract law principles or if the user had specifically utilized an online tool provided by the custodian to grant access to their representative. Therefore, the custodian’s ability to deny access hinges on the specific terms of service of CloudVault and whether Mr. Abernathy had previously granted access through an alternative method recognized by NMUDATA.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. Specifically, NMSA 45-12-107 addresses the disclosure of digital assets by a fiduciary. This statute distinguishes between digital assets that are the user’s property and those that are not. For digital assets where the user has a right of access or control, the fiduciary is generally entitled to the same rights as the user. However, for digital assets that are not the user’s property, such as a cloud storage account where the user is merely a licensee or a digital asset that is the proprietary information of a third party, the fiduciary’s right to access is more restricted. In such cases, the fiduciary must obtain a court order or consent from the user or the third-party content provider to access or disclose the content of those digital assets. This limitation is designed to protect the privacy and proprietary interests of third parties and to respect the terms of service agreements governing non-property digital assets. Therefore, when a fiduciary seeks to access a digital asset that is not the user’s property, the legal framework requires a specific legal authorization beyond the general authority granted by a power of attorney or a will.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law, as codified in Chapter 46, Article 10 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA 1978), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a user’s death or incapacity. Specifically, NMSA 1978, § 46-10-104 outlines the limitations on a custodian’s duty to disclose digital assets to a user’s representative. This statute establishes that a custodian of digital assets is not required to disclose to a legal representative or other beneficiary information contained in a digital asset that the custodian reasonably believes is contained in a digital asset to which the user has a right of access and that the user has not consented to disclosure of to the representative or beneficiary. This consent can be given in an electronic record or by other means. The law prioritizes the user’s intent regarding the privacy of their digital communications and data. Therefore, a custodian can refuse to disclose content if they reasonably believe it is private to the user and not intended for broader distribution, even if the user is deceased or incapacitated, unless explicit consent for such disclosure has been provided by the user. This principle is crucial for protecting the privacy of digital communications and personal data.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in NMSA 1978, Chapter 46, Article 10, addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a user’s death or incapacitation. Specifically, NMSA 1978, § 46-10-103, outlines the default rule regarding a digital asset custodian’s ability to disclose the content of electronic communications of a deceased user. Absent a specific court order or a contrary provision in the user’s terms of service agreement with the custodian, a custodian generally cannot disclose the content of electronic communications to a personal representative or beneficiary. This is because, under the Act, the default position is that the personal representative steps into the shoes of the deceased regarding their digital assets, but this right does not automatically grant access to the content of private electronic communications unless the custodian’s terms of service explicitly allow it or a court order mandates it. The Act distinguishes between the right to control, manage, or terminate digital assets and the right to access the content of electronic communications. Therefore, a personal representative’s authority over a deceased user’s digital assets, such as social media accounts or email, does not inherently include the right to read the content of private emails or messages without further authorization. The correct application of NMSA 1978, § 46-10-103, dictates that the custodian’s terms of service are paramount in determining access to the content of electronic communications, unless a court intervenes.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 11 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), provides a framework for managing digital assets upon a person’s death. Section 45-11-103 NMSA specifically addresses the authority of a personal representative, trustee, or other fiduciary to access and control a digital asset. When a fiduciary has the legal authority to access a digital asset, they can exercise the same rights as the user who created or held the asset. This includes the right to control, manage, and dispose of the digital asset in accordance with the terms of the user’s online service agreement and any applicable law. Therefore, a personal representative appointed under New Mexico law, who has been granted authority over the decedent’s estate, can, by virtue of their fiduciary role and the provisions of NMUDATA, access and manage digital assets. This access is not contingent on a separate court order specifically authorizing access to digital assets, provided the fiduciary’s general authority to manage the estate is established. The law aims to streamline the process of digital asset inheritance, recognizing the increasing importance of these assets in modern estates. The fiduciary’s actions must still comply with the terms of service of the digital asset provider and any specific instructions left by the user, such as through an online tool provided by the service.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. Specifically, NMSA 45-12-110 outlines the procedure for a digital asset fiduciary to access and control a user’s digital assets. This section grants a fiduciary, such as an executor or trustee, the right to access the digital assets of a deceased user. However, this access is not absolute and is subject to the terms of service of the digital asset custodian. The law prioritizes the user’s intent as expressed in the terms of service, unless the user has provided specific instructions through a digital asset control document or a will. In this scenario, the deceased user’s explicit instructions in their will regarding the disposition of their cryptocurrency wallet, which is a digital asset, would supersede the general terms of service of the cryptocurrency exchange platform. The will serves as a legally binding document that overrides the default provisions of the custodian’s terms of service, provided the will is validly executed under New Mexico law. Therefore, the executor’s authority stems from the will’s specific directive concerning the cryptocurrency wallet, enabling them to access and manage it according to the deceased’s wishes.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in NMSA 1978, Chapter 45, Article 10, addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. Specifically, NMSA 1978, § 45-10-102, governs the disclosure of digital assets by a custodian. This section establishes that a custodian of digital assets shall disclose to the user’s representative (as defined in NMSA 1978, § 45-10-101) the content of the user’s digital assets, other than the content of electronic communications of the user. The exception for electronic communications is further clarified in NMSA 1978, § 45-10-103, which states that a custodian shall not disclose the content of the user’s electronic communications, even if the user has a separate right to the content of the electronic communications. The question asks about the disclosure of the content of electronic communications, which is explicitly prohibited by statute, regardless of whether the user’s will or other documentation grants access to such content. Therefore, the custodian is legally bound not to disclose the content of the user’s electronic communications.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDAA), specifically codified in New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) Chapter 46A, Article 10, governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. A crucial aspect of this act relates to the disclosure of digital assets by custodians. NMSA § 46A-10-109 outlines the process by which a custodian can be compelled to disclose a user’s digital assets. This section establishes that a custodian must provide a digital asset to a beneficiary or representative of the user’s estate if presented with a valid court order or other validly executed legal document. The act emphasizes that a custodian may refuse disclosure if the user’s terms of service or a separate agreement with the user prohibits disclosure. However, the statute also provides a mechanism for overriding such prohibitions. Specifically, NMSA § 46A-10-109(b)(2) allows a court to order disclosure if the user’s terms of service or other agreement are found to be unconscionable. Unconscionability in contract law generally refers to terms that are so one-sided and unfair as to be oppressive, often due to unequal bargaining power or deceptive practices. Therefore, if a court determines that the terms of service preventing disclosure are unconscionable, it can mandate the custodian to release the digital assets. The question tests the understanding of when a custodian’s refusal to disclose based on terms of service can be overridden under the NMUDAA. The correct answer hinges on the specific provision allowing court intervention due to unconscionable terms.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 12 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. Specifically, NMSA § 45-12-107 outlines the procedure for a personal representative to access a digital asset custodian’s records. The law distinguishes between the content of digital assets and records related to the digital assets. A personal representative can generally access the content of digital assets of the deceased, subject to certain terms of service. However, access to records related to digital assets, such as communication metadata or account activity logs, requires a court order or the user’s explicit consent. The statute emphasizes that terms of service of a digital asset custodian cannot override the rights granted to a personal representative under the Act concerning the content of digital assets, but they can impose reasonable conditions on access to records. In this scenario, the personal representative seeks access to both the digital asset’s content and the custodian’s records. New Mexico law permits access to the content of digital assets by the personal representative without a court order, provided the terms of service do not prohibit it, which is a general allowance. However, access to the custodian’s records, which are distinct from the asset’s content, necessitates a court order, absent explicit prior consent from the user. Therefore, the personal representative must obtain a court order to access the custodian’s records.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), specifically NMSA 1978, § 56-10-101 et seq., governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. This act defines a digital asset as an electronic record in which an entity has a right or interest. It differentiates between a “custodian” and a “user.” A custodian is a person that controls a computer, computer system, or computer network on which a digital asset is stored or processed. A user is a person who has a right or interest in a digital asset. The act also outlines methods for accessing digital assets, including through a user’s online tool, a representative’s written request, or a court order. The scenario involves a custodian, “ByteGuard Inc.,” and a user, “Elara Vance,” who passed away. Elara’s estate executor, “Mr. Aris Thorne,” is seeking access to her digital assets. Under NMUDATA, if a user has not provided specific instructions in their terms of service or a separate document regarding digital asset access after death, the custodian must grant access to the executor if the executor provides a written request and a copy of the death certificate. The act prioritizes the user’s explicit instructions. However, in the absence of such instructions, the default legal framework of NMUDATA applies. The question probes the specific requirement for the executor to provide a copy of the death certificate to the custodian, which is a mandatory step for accessing digital assets when no prior user directive is in place. This step is crucial for the custodian to verify the user’s death and the executor’s authority, thereby fulfilling their legal obligations under New Mexico law. The core concept tested is the procedural requirement for an executor to gain access to a deceased user’s digital assets when the user has not pre-arranged access preferences, emphasizing the importance of the death certificate as proof.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NM UDAA), codified in Chapter 45, Article 13 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. Specifically, NMSA § 45-13-106 addresses the duties of a digital asset custodian. This statute establishes that a custodian owes a duty of care to the user, which is the same duty of care that a custodian owes to a person on whose behalf a custodian holds a tangible asset. This standard of care is generally understood as the ordinary care expected of a prudent person in managing their own affairs, or in some contexts, a higher standard depending on the specific relationship and circumstances. The law does not mandate a fiduciary duty for all custodians in all situations; rather, it imposes a duty of care akin to that for tangible property. Therefore, the custodian’s obligation is to act with reasonable diligence and prudence in safeguarding the digital assets entrusted to them.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMDALA), codified in Chapter 24 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA 2023 Supp.), specifically addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. A key aspect of this act is the distinction between the terms of service of an online platform and the intent of the user regarding their digital assets upon incapacitation or death. The NMDALA generally prioritizes the user’s explicit instructions or a clear intent expressed in a digital asset control document. However, when such explicit instructions are absent, the act provides a framework for custodians to grant access. NMSA 2023 Supp. § 24-1-107 outlines the conditions under which a custodian may grant access to a user’s digital assets. This section empowers custodians to grant access to a person authorized by the user, which includes an executor, administrator, or personal representative of the user’s estate, or a beneficiary under a will or trust, if the custodian has a reasonable belief that the person is so authorized and that the disclosure is consistent with the user’s intent. The act does not mandate that a custodian must await a court order if a clear estate plan or beneficiary designation exists, nor does it automatically grant access to any family member without proper authorization or evidence of intent. The presence of a valid will or trust document naming a beneficiary for digital assets, or a specific digital asset control document, would typically satisfy the custodian’s need for a reasonable belief of authorization and consistency with user intent, thereby allowing access without an additional court order. The scenario presented involves a deceased individual whose digital assets are held by a platform. The deceased’s will clearly designates their spouse as the sole beneficiary of their entire estate, which would encompass all digital assets. This will is a legally recognized document establishing the spouse’s entitlement and authority. Therefore, the custodian can provide access to the spouse based on the will, as it serves as evidence of authorization and aligns with the presumed intent of the deceased. The explanation emphasizes that the NMDALA provides a pathway for access through established legal instruments like wills, without necessitating a separate court order in every instance, provided the custodian can reasonably ascertain the authorization and user intent.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Law, codified in Chapter 45, Article 13 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA), addresses the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets upon a person’s death. Specifically, NMSA § 45-13-107 outlines the procedure for granting access to digital assets. This section distinguishes between digital assets that are content and digital assets that are services. For content, a user’s digital assets are treated as personal property. For services, access is generally governed by the terms of service agreement. When a fiduciary, such as an executor or administrator, is appointed to manage a decedent’s estate, they can request access to the digital assets. The law prioritizes the user’s intent as expressed in an online tool or a separate document. In the absence of such an explicit directive, the fiduciary is granted access to the digital assets that the user had the right to access and that the fiduciary is authorized to access. This access is limited to what is reasonably necessary to administer the estate. The law also emphasizes the protection of the user’s privacy, meaning the fiduciary cannot access certain categories of digital assets, like private communications, unless specifically authorized by the user’s intent or by court order. The key principle is balancing the fiduciary’s need to administer the estate with the user’s privacy rights and expressed wishes regarding their digital legacy. The law does not mandate a specific calculation for determining access rights; rather, it establishes a framework for legal entitlement based on user intent and fiduciary authority.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA) governs the rights and responsibilities concerning digital assets. Specifically, Section 34-1-104 of the NMUDATA addresses the creation of digital assets by a debtor. This section clarifies that a debtor’s intent to create a digital asset is a crucial element in establishing ownership and control. The law focuses on the manifestation of intent through specific actions or agreements, rather than mere passive possession or awareness of a digital asset’s existence. Therefore, when a debtor explicitly states or demonstrates their intention to create a digital asset, such as by entering into an agreement to generate a unique cryptographic token or by actively participating in the creation process with the clear purpose of establishing a digital asset, this intent is legally recognized. This contrasts with situations where a debtor might merely hold or interact with a digital asset without the specific intent to bring it into legal existence as their own creation. The act emphasizes the debtor’s affirmative actions that signify the creation and establishment of their rights over the digital asset.

The New Mexico Uniform Digital Assets Act (NMUDATA), specifically NMSA 1978 § 45-1-101 et seq., governs the rights and obligations concerning digital assets. When a user of an online service dies, the service provider’s ability to disclose the user’s digital assets is primarily determined by the terms of service agreed upon by the user and the provider, and any specific instructions the user left regarding their digital assets. NMSA 1978 § 45-1-107 outlines that a digital asset owner may consent to disclosure of their digital assets to a fiduciary. This consent can be given through a will, trust, power of attorney, or a separate document. However, the Act also acknowledges that service providers may have their own terms of service that could restrict disclosure, even with user consent, unless those terms are overridden by specific legal mandates or the user’s explicit instructions within the platform’s framework. The Act aims to balance the user’s privacy with the fiduciary’s need to access assets for estate administration. A court order compelling disclosure would generally be a last resort if other methods of consent or contractual agreements are insufficient or unclear. The key is that the law empowers the user to control access, but the provider’s terms and the nature of the consent mechanism are critical factors.