Edmiston v. City of Hobbs

(concurring in part, dissenting in part).(29) I concur in the remand to the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) for further proceedings. Additional findings are necessary to determine the benefits to which Worker is entitled. I dissent from the majority opinion, however, to the extent that it appears to expand improperly our decision in Leo v. Cornucopia Restaurant, 118 N.M. 354, 881 P.2d 714 (Ct.App.1994).(30) Although I agree with much of the majority opinion, I cannot agree that Worker is necessarily entitled to benefits for all disability caused by her work-related accident and her myeloma.…