Gearhart v. Eidson Metal Products
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HENDLEY, Judge.
Plaintiff appeals a workman’s compensation award. He contends that the trial court erred in (1) finding that he had a 5 percent scheduled injury impairment but was not disabled, (2) finding that plaintiff would not require future medicals, (3) refusing to assess certain costs against defendant, and (4) awarding attorney fees in the amount of $200.
Scheduled Injury.
The trial court found that plaintiff had suffered an injury to the elbow resulting in a 5 percent impairment of the elbow (§ 52-1 — 43(B), N.M.S.A.1978), but that he was not totally or partially disabled,…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Adams v. Loffland Brothers Drilling CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970
- Schiller v. Southwest Air Rangers, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
- Herndon v. Albuquerque Public SchoolsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1978
- Hales v. Van CleaveNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1967
- Ortega v. New Mexico State Highway DepartmentNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Fryar v. JohnsenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- Hernandez v. Mead Foods, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1986
- Casias v. Zia Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
- Lamont v. New Mexico Military InstituteNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
- St. Clair v. County of GrantNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.