Legal Opinion
Potter v. PATTERSON UTI DRILLING CO.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided April 8, 2010No. 29,566PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
VIGIL, Judge.
{1} In this case, Worker was injured while working for Employer on a drilling rig in Pennsylvania, and seeks workers’ compensation benefits in New Mexico. The dispositive question is whether the employment contract was “made” in New Mexico because after Worker accepted the offer of employment in New Mexico, he was required to take and pass a drug test in Pennsylvania before he could start working on the oil rig. We hold that this requirement did not negate formation of the employment contract in New Mexico. Accordingly, we reverse the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ)…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Pope v. Gap, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
- Levario v. Ysidro Villareal Labor AgencyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
- Bowen v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Orcutt v. S & L Paint Contractors, Ltd.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
- Famiglietta v. Ivie-Miller Enterprises, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Montoya v. Financial Federal Credit, Inc.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
- Youngquist Brothers Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
- Youngquist Brothers Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
- Mike Marion Niday v. Roehl Transport, Inc.Court of Appeals of Iowa · 2019
- Youngquist Bros. Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office of Colo.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2016