Comp benefit limits for mental impairment ruled unconstitutional
Reprints
The Supreme Court of New Mexico on Monday ruled that a state law that limits the duration of benefits for subsequent mental impairments to the duration of benefits allowed for the underlying physical condition violates the equal protection clause of the state’s constitution.
The ruling in NO. S-1-SC-39225 stems from a case in which a teacher for the Aztec Municipal School District in San Juan County injured her knee, impairing her physically, which led to an undescribed secondary mental impairment.
The woman received 150 weeks of permanent partial disability benefits for her knee injury. Because state law limited permanent disability benefits for a secondary mental injury to the maximum period allowable for the disability caused by the physical impairment, a workers compensation judge said she was entitled to 150 weeks of PPD for the mental injury.
On appeal the woman argued that limiting the duration of benefits for secondary mental injuries to the duration for physical injuries violates the equal protection clause of the state constitution, basing her claim on provisions in the Workers’ Compensation Act that establish different ways to determine the duration of benefits.
The state Court of Appeals agreed, and the state’s highest court affirmed that decision.
“Both mentally disabled workers and physically disabled workers are impaired in their capacities to perform work,” the Supreme Court said, adding that under state law “(a) mental disability … affects workers in the same way as a compensable physical disability does by preventing them from earning a wage because of an on-the-job accident. The idea that mentally disabled workers may be entitled to recover less compensation than physically disabled workers is contrary to the purposes of the (Workers’ Compensation Act), which guide our equal protection analysis.”
