Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Adrian Nigales v. Albuqueque Public Schools
Date: 11-20-2024
Case Number: A-1-CA-41453
Judge: Leonard J. Padilla
Court: New Mexico Workers' Compensation Administration
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Albuquerque Workers' Compensation Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney: Kimberly A. Syrn
Description:
Albquerque, New Mexico workers' compensation lawyer reprsented the Plaintiff.
Worker initially asserts in his memorandum in opposition that the Legislature' did not intend workers to bear the financial costs of obtaining expert medical * testimony to prove their entitlement to Worker's compensation benefits. [MIO 2] I- However, the issue before this Court is whether the district court abused its i discretion in denying Worker's application for an independent medical examination (IME), pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 52-1-51 (2013). The plain language of' Section 52-1-51(B) comports with Worker's assertion and states that "[t]he employer shall pay for any [IME]." See High Ridge Hinkle Joint Venture v. City of Albuquerque, 1998-NMSC-050, ΒΆ 5, 126 N.M. 413, 970 P.2d 599 ("[T]he plain I language of a statute is the primary indicator of legislative intent." (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). Thus, if Worker had been entitled to the IME,' Section 52-1-51(B) would have required Employer to pay for it. Yet, Worker must still demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion in denying the application for the IME, pursuant to Section 52-1-51 (A). Consequently, we conclude i this argument does not demonstrate error.
Nogales v. Albuquerque Pub. Schs., A-l-CA-41453 (N.M. App. Nov 20, 2024)
Worker initially asserts in his memorandum in opposition that the Legislature' did not intend workers to bear the financial costs of obtaining expert medical * testimony to prove their entitlement to Worker's compensation benefits. [MIO 2] I- However, the issue before this Court is whether the district court abused its i discretion in denying Worker's application for an independent medical examination (IME), pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 52-1-51 (2013). The plain language of' Section 52-1-51(B) comports with Worker's assertion and states that "[t]he employer shall pay for any [IME]." See High Ridge Hinkle Joint Venture v. City of Albuquerque, 1998-NMSC-050, ΒΆ 5, 126 N.M. 413, 970 P.2d 599 ("[T]he plain I language of a statute is the primary indicator of legislative intent." (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). Thus, if Worker had been entitled to the IME,' Section 52-1-51(B) would have required Employer to pay for it. Yet, Worker must still demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion in denying the application for the IME, pursuant to Section 52-1-51 (A). Consequently, we conclude i this argument does not demonstrate error.
Nogales v. Albuquerque Pub. Schs., A-l-CA-41453 (N.M. App. Nov 20, 2024)
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Adrian Nigales v. Albuqueque Public Schools?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard Adrian Nigales v. Albuqueque Public Schools?
This case was heard in New Mexico Workers' Compensation Administration, NM. The presiding judge was Leonard J. Padilla.
Who were the attorneys in Adrian Nigales v. Albuqueque Public Schools?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Albuquerque Workers' Compensation Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Kimberly A. Syrn.
When was Adrian Nigales v. Albuqueque Public Schools decided?
This case was decided on November 20, 2024.