Fitch v. Sam Tanksley Trucking Co.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WALTERS, Judge.
Although defendant has not followed precisely the format of Rule 9(m)(2) R.Civ.App.P., N.M.S.A. 1978, the Brief-in-chief clearly defines the matters appealed. Therefore, we review on the merits the workman’s compensation award granting plaintiff escalated permanent partial disability benefits and $13,000 in attorney’s fees, and reverse.
Prior to the date scheduled for oral argument, both parties requested summary reversal on the issue of escalated compensation benefits awarded by the trial court. We grant that request, agreeing with the parties that the issue of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Fryar v. JohnsenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- Adams v. Loffland Brothers Drilling CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970
- Mora v. MartinezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
- Brown Ex Rel. Brown v. Safeway Stores, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1971
- Genuine Parts Co. v. GarciaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Woodson v. Phillips Petroleum Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- Sanchez v. Homestake Mining Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1985
- Manzanares v. Lerner's, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- Jennings v. GabaldonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1982
- Amos v. Gilbert Western Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.