For serious permanent disfigurement about the face or head, the workers’ compensation judge may allow, in addition to other compensation benefits that may be allowed under the Workers’ Compensation Act [52-1-1 NMSA 1978], an additional sum for compensation on account of the serious permanent disfigurement as he deems just but not to exceed a maximum of twenty-five hundred dollars ($2,500).
HISTORY:
1953 59-10-18.5, enacted by Laws 1959, ch. 67, § 23; 1967, ch. 151, § 4; 1986, ch. 22, § 14; 1989, ch. 263, § 26.
Notes to Decisions
Applicability.
Statute gave specified compensation for total blindness of one eye from injury suffered by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment of the injured workman and like compensation for the loss of one eye by enucleation; an award for facial disfigurement within a particular limit was allowed by statute where a prima facie case had been made because disfigurement impaired earning power and enucleation could be proven by an injured worker to be a facial disfigurement. Elkins v. Lallier, 1934-NMSC-039, 38 N.M. 316, 32 P.2d 759, 1934 N.M. LEXIS 34 (N.M. 1934).
Error.
In a workers’ compensation proceeding, the trial court erred in denying the claimant’s motion seeking additional benefits under former 59-10-18.5, 1953 Comp. (now 52-1-44 NMSA 1978) for serious, permanent disfigurement, as his motion and his physician’s affidavit presented a material issue of fact. Cromer v. J. W. Jones Constr. Co., 1968-NMCA-027, 79 N.M. 179, 441 P.2d 219, 1968 N.M. App. LEXIS 451 (N.M. Ct. App. 1968), overruled, Schiller v. Southwest Air Rangers, 1975-NMSC-018, 87 N.M. 476, 535 P.2d 1327, 1975 N.M. LEXIS 824 (N.M. 1975).
Evidence.
—Insufficient.
In a workmen’s compensation action, a claimant was not entitled to an award for facial disfigurement under former 59-10-18.5, 1953 Comp. (now 52-1-44 NMSA 1978) where no evidence existed supporting his contention. Torres v. Kansas City Structural Steel Co., 1971-NMCA-043, 82 N.M. 511, 484 P.2d 353, 1971 N.M. App. LEXIS 687 (N.M. Ct. App. 1971).
Jurisdiction.
Probate courts, when they exercised their jurisdiction under former 1929 Code, § 34-412 in the appointment and removal of guardians of persons of unsound mind, as well as district courts, had to look to the law of “lunatics and drunkards,” former 1929 Code, c. 85, not to the law of “guardian and ward,” former 1929 Code, c. 62, for the procedure and incidents of the jurisdiction. In re Miera's Guardianship, 1934-NMSC-017, 38 N.M. 377, 34 P.2d 299, 1934 N.M. LEXIS 52 (N.M. 1934).
Prima facie case.
Where an employee received the fixed amounts prescribed in former 1929 Code, § 156-117(b) for the enucleation of an eye by work-related injury, he established a prima facie case for facial disfigurement under the same statute, and an award of facial disfigurement damages in addition to the fixed amounts was not error. Elkins v. Lallier, 1934-NMSC-039, 38 N.M. 316, 32 P.2d 759, 1934 N.M. LEXIS 34 (N.M. 1934).