Legal Opinion · Dissent
Riesenecker v. Arkansas Best Freight System
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided May 17, 1990No. 11342Published
1DissentApodaca, Judge
I respectfully dissent. I cannot concur with the majority since, in my judgment, it inappropriately weighs the evidence and substitutes its determination for that of the fact finder.
The lump-sum award in this appeal was based on the workers’ compensation judge’s (judge) conclusion that it was in worker’s “rehabilitative best interests” to make such an award under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (the Act), NMSA 1978, Section 52-1-30 (Orig.Pamp.) (replaced by NMSA 1978, Section 52-5-12 (Repl.Pamp. 1987)). Employer contends on appeal that the judge’s lump-sum determination did not meet the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Tallman v. ABF (Arkansas Best Freight)New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1988
- State Ex Rel. Klineline v. BlackhurstNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1988
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. AnayaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- National Council on Compensation Insurance v. New Mexico State Corp. CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1988
- Marez v. Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.