Romero v. Zia Company

417 P.2d 881, 76 N.M. 686
New Mexico Supreme Court·Decided September 6, 1966·No. 7949·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

OPINION

JOE W. WOOD, Judge, Court of Appeals.

Plaintiff appeals from a denial of workmen’s compensation. All of the points on appeal relate.to the issue of causal connection between disability and accident. The trial court found that plaintiff does not and has not suffered from any disability which, as a medical probability, is a natural and direct result of the claimed accident.

Plaintiff’s’ attack on this finding" relies on the' testimony of one medical witness. There were two other medical witnesses whose testimony conflicts with plaintiffs’ medical witness on the questions of (1) any injury at all, (2) plaintiff’s physical condition and (3) the cause of his present physical condition.

The trial court resolved the conflicts in the medical testimony and determined the facts. Its findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence. Not having established the causal connection required by § 59-10-13.3 (B), N.M.S.A. 1953, plaintiff cannot recover. See Torres v. Kennecott Copper Corp., 76 N.M. 623, 417 P.2d 435, August 22, 1966.

The judgment is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

NOBLE and MOISE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Romero v. Zia Company, 417 P.2d 881, 76 N.M. 686 (N.M. 1966).

417 P.2d 881 (Romero v. Zia Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Trujillo v. Beaty Elec. Co., Inc.
577 P.2d 431 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1978)
Corzine v. Sears, Roebuck and Company
456 P.2d 892 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1969)
Mares v. City of Clovis
449 P.2d 667 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1968)
Rohrer v. Eidal International
449 P.2d 81 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1968)
Gallegos v. Kennedy
446 P.2d 642 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1968)