Jojola v. Aetna Life & Casualty
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HARTZ, Judge.
The Workers’ Compensation Division (the WCD) dismissed employer’s claim against the New Mexico Subsequent Injury Fund (the Fund) on the ground that employer had not filed a certificate of pre-existing impairment prior to worker’s subsequent injury, as required by a statute that became effective after the subsequent injury but before employer filed its claim against the Fund. Employer appeals. We reverse. FACTS
Because the Fund did not challenge the facts stated in employer’s docketing statement, we accept those facts as true for purposes of this appeal. See State v.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. CalancheNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
- Canton Textile Mills, Inc. v. LathemSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
- Wilson v. New Mexico Lumber & Timber Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1938
- Strickland v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1988
- Davis v. Meadors-Cherry CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Jeffrey v. Hays Plumbing & HeatingNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1994
- Aragon v. Furr's, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1991
- Consolidated Freightways, Inc. v. Subsequent Injury FundNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
- Lucero v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1991
- Wegner v. Hair ProductsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.