The payment or award of benefits under the workers’ compensation law of another state, territory, province or foreign nation to an employee or his dependents otherwise entitled on account of such injury or death to the benefits of the Workers’ Compensation Act [52-1-1 NMSA 1978] shall not be a bar to a claim for benefits under that act; provided that claim under that act is filed within one year after such injury or death. If compensation is paid or awarded under that act:
A. the medical and related benefits furnished or paid for by the employer under such other workers’ compensation law on account of such injury or death shall be credited against the medical and related benefits to which the employee would have been entitled under the Workers’ Compensation Act [52-1-1 NMSA 1978] had claim been made solely under that act;
B. the total amount of all income benefits paid or awarded the employee under such other workers’ compensation law shall be credited against the total amount of income benefits which would have been due the employee under the Workers’ Compensation Act [52-1-1 NMSA 1978] had claim been made solely under that act; and
C. the total amount of death benefits paid or awarded under such other workers’ compensation law shall be credited against the total amount of death benefits due under the Workers’ Compensation Act [52-1-1 NMSA 1978].
HISTORY:
1953 59-10-33.2, enacted by Laws 1975, ch. 241, § 2; 1989, ch. 263, § 41.
Notes to Decisions
Benefits beyond workers’ compensation.
Generally.
In enacting 52-1-65 NMSA 1978 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, the legislature intended to avoid the complexities involved in the application of “full faith and credit” and “res judicata” in workmen’s compensation cases, thus ending the “race to the courthouse” between employers and employees in different states. Webb v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 1981-NMCA-007, 95 N.M. 603, 624 P.2d 545, 1981 N.M. App. LEXIS 699 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981).
Applicability.
Workmen’s compensation benefits awarded under the Workmen’s Compensation Act were not barred or even offset by receipt of federal benefits arising from the death of an employee while he was on a dual-employment mission that included work for the Coast Guard Reserve. Clemmer v. Carpenter, 1982-NMCA-098, 98 N.M. 302, 648 P.2d 341, 1982 N.M. App. LEXIS 894 (N.M. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 98 N.M. 336, 648 P.2d 794, 1982 N.M. LEXIS 3010 (N.M. 1982).
Benefits beyond workers’ compensation.
Majority of those jurisdictions that disallowed recovery of workers’ compensation benefits and payments under a state pension plan reached such result based on the existence of express statutory provisions denying the right to receive benefits under similar statutes, but other than exception of an award of compensation benefits made under the laws of another jurisdiction, as set forth in 52-1-65 NMSA 1978 the Workers’ Compensation Act in effect at the time of a claimant’s disability was silent concerning the right of an employer to claim an offset or credit for other disability benefits furnished by the employer arising from the same injury and resulting disability. The trial court properly applied the rule that, in the absence of a statutory restriction, a worker could properly contract with his employer for benefits in addition to those provided in the Workers’ Compensation Act. Montney v. State, 1989-NMCA-002, 108 N.M. 326, 772 P.2d 360, 1989 N.M. App. LEXIS 13 (N.M. Ct. App. 1989), superseded by statute as stated in Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2007-NMCA-057, 141 N.M. 617, 159 P.3d 266, 2007 N.M. App. LEXIS 29 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007).
Construction with other law.
Workers’ Compensation Act, although expressly providing in 52-1-65 and 52-1-70 NMSA 1978 for credits for payment of unemployment compensation and for compensation benefits paid in other jurisdictions, made no provision that authorized an offset for receipt of public employee retirement benefits, and the Public Employee Retirement Act (PERA) was also silent concerning any prohibition against the payment of PERA benefits where an injured state employee also demonstrated entitlement to workers’ compensation benefits. Under the general rule of statutory construction, that where the legislature adopts a statute restricting or limiting certain matters, the express mention of one thing imports a legislative intent not to include others in the restriction or limitation, the appellate court discerned no legislative intent to preclude recovery of benefits under both PERA and the Workers’ Compensation Act. Montney v. State, 1989-NMCA-002, 108 N.M. 326, 772 P.2d 360, 1989 N.M. App. LEXIS 13 (N.M. Ct. App. 1989), superseded by statute as stated in Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2007-NMCA-057, 141 N.M. 617, 159 P.3d 266, 2007 N.M. App. LEXIS 29 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007).
Finality.
Under 52-1-65 NMSA 1978 of the New Mexico Workmen’s Compensation Act, an Arizona award of workmen’s compensation benefits was final only with regard to rights arising under Arizona laws and did not preclude the injured worker residing in New Mexico from seeking an additional award of benefits by New Mexico. Webb v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 1981-NMCA-007, 95 N.M. 603, 624 P.2d 545, 1981 N.M. App. LEXIS 699 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981).
Foreign decrees.
Section 52-1-65 NMSA 1978 provides that payments made under the workmen’s compensation law of another state did not bar a subsequent claim in New Mexico; An award of workmen’s compensation benefits by the Industrial Commission of Arizona was final only with regard to rights arising under that state’s laws. Webb v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 1981-NMCA-007, 95 N.M. 603, 624 P.2d 545, 1981 N.M. App. LEXIS 699 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981).
Special errand.
Workmen’s compensation death benefits were properly awarded to the widow of an employee that was killed in a car accident while driving through 10 inches of snow to attend a Coast Guard Reserve meeting and also to do some work for the employer after the meeting; benefits were not offset by the receipt of federal benefits by the employee’s widow and stepdaughter from the Veterans Administration as a result of the employee’s death on the way to the Coast Guard meeting. Clemmer v. Carpenter, 1982-NMCA-098, 98 N.M. 302, 648 P.2d 341, 1982 N.M. App. LEXIS 894 (N.M. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 98 N.M. 336, 648 P.2d 794, 1982 N.M. LEXIS 3010 (N.M. 1982).
Time limitations.
The voluntary payment of compensation benefits pursuant to the law of another state, in itself, does not toll the time to sue provision of 52-1-65 NMSA 1978. Ryan v. Bruenger M. Trucking, 1983-NMCA-043, 100 N.M. 15, 665 P.2d 277, 1983 N.M. App. LEXIS 706 (N.M. Ct. App. 1983), overruled in part, Schultz v. Pojoaque Tribal Police Dep't, 2013-NMSC-013, 2013 N.M. LEXIS 113 (N.M. 2013).
Claim of a Texas resident who was injured while working on a temporary job in New Mexico, which was filed within one year after the claimant’s employer and its insurer ceased making voluntary payments but more than a year after the claimant was injured, was timely filed because the voluntary payments were sufficient under 52-1-36 NMSA 1978 to toll the filing requirements of 52-1-65 NMSA 1978. Saenz v. McCormick Constr. Co., 1981-NMCA-025, 95 N.M. 609, 624 P.2d 551, 1981 N.M. App. LEXIS 704 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981), overruled in part, Schultz v. Pojoaque Tribal Police Dep't, 2013-NMSC-013, 2013 N.M. LEXIS 113 (N.M. 2013).
Transitory employee.
The Oklahoma truck driver was entitled to workmen’s compensation after sustaining an injury within New Mexico because 52-1-65 NMSA 1978 did not expressly provide that benefits were to be paid a transitory employee injured in state but that the statute, however, contemplated that state benefits were to be paid and that benefits from another state did not control the permissible recovery within the state. Burns v. Transcon Lines, 1979-NMCA-030, 92 N.M. 791, 595 P.2d 761, 1979 N.M. App. LEXIS 825 (N.M. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 92 N.M. 675, 593 P.2d 1078, 1979 N.M. LEXIS 1374 (N.M. 1979).
Workers’ compensation.
A worker who is entitled to payment or award of benefits under workers’ compensation laws of another state is not barred from claiming benefits under New Mexico’s act; however, the employer is entitled to a credit for benefits paid under the other state’s law. Hammonds v. Freymiller Trucking, 1993-NMCA-030, 115 N.M. 364, 851 P.2d 486, 1993 N.M. App. LEXIS 21 (N.M. Ct. App. 1993).