Legal Opinion
Vincent v. United Nuclear-Homestake Partners
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided October 26, 1976No. 2550PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WOOD, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff has silicosis. He was awarded compensation benefits under the Occupational Disease Disablement Law. Sections 59-11-1, et seq., N.M.S.A.1953 (2d Repl. Vol. 9, pt. 1). Defendant appeals. The issues involve: (1) compensability for silicosis; (2) extent of disablement; (3) amount of compensation awarded; and (4) lumpsum payment.
Compensability for Silicosis
At the time of trial, plaintiff was 43 years old. He had worked as an underground miner since he was 16 years of age. He was employed as an underground miner by defendant from July, 1966 to January 30, 1975. On…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Holman v. Oriental RefineryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
- Janney v. Fullroe, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
- Treider v. Doherty and CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1974
- Herrera v. Fluor Utah, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
- Frkovich v. PetranovichNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Zoss v. United Building Centers, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Buchanan v. Kerr-McGee Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
- Chadwick v. Public Service Co. of NMNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1986
- Marable v. Singer Business MacHinesNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
- Mattis v. Weaver Electric, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.