Moya v. City of Albuquerque

29 Citing cases

  1. Rodriguez v. Permian Drilling Corp.

    258 P.3d 443 (N.M. 2011)   Cited 17 times
    Listing additional factors

    {7} "All workers' compensation cases are reviewed under a whole record standard of review." Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. As a general matter, we defer to the expertise of the administrative judge and "[w]e will not . . . substitute our judgment for that of the agency; although the evidence may support inconsistent findings, we will not disturb the agency's finding if supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole."

  2. Dewitt v. Rent-A-Center, Inc.

    146 N.M. 453 (N.M. 2009)   Cited 100 times
    Holding that the employer did not fail to provide the worker with reasonable and necessary health-care services when the worker had the requisite information to contact the claims adjuster, but did not

    {12} We review factual findings of Workers' Compensation Administration judges under a whole record standard of review. Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. "On appeal, to determine whether a challenged finding is supported by substantial evidence, we have always given deference to the fact finder, even when we apply, as here, whole record review."

  3. Taylor v. Waste Mgmt. of N.M.

    2021 NMCA 26 (N.M. Ct. App. 2021)   Cited 5 times
    Providing that if the plain language of a statute is clear and unambiguous, it generally must be given effect

    See Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2007-NMCA-057, ¶ 19, 141 N.M. 617, 159 P.3d 266 (recognizing that Section 52-1-25.1(B) "absolves an employer from paying [TTD] benefits if the worker accepts employment with another employer at the worker's pre-injury wage"), rev'd on other grounds, 2008-NMSC-004, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. Under Subsection (B)(1), the worker is not entitled to TTD benefits if the at-injury employer offers work at or above the worker's preinjury wage—even if the worker declines the offer.

  4. Kaufman v. Univ. of N.M. Hosp.

    Docket No. A-1-CA-36456 (N.M. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 2019)

    {16} We review Employer's arguments under a whole record standard of review. See Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004 ¶ 6,143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. Generally, "we will not substitute our judgment for that of the agency; although the evidence may support inconsistent findings, we will not disturb the agency's finding if supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole."

  5. Barrozo v. Albertson's, Inc.

    Docket No. A-1-CA-36197 (N.M. Ct. App. Apr. 9, 2019)   Cited 1 times

    See Green v. Gen. Accident Ins. Co. of Am., 1987-NMSC-111, ¶ 19, 106 N.M. 523, 746 P.2d 152 (holding "a denial of a motion for summary judgment is not reviewable after final judgment on the merits" and observing that "[i]f a summary judgment motion is improperly denied, the error is not reversible for the result becomes merged in the subsequent trial"). {11} We review the WCJ's factual findings under a whole record standard of review, Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926, giving deference to the WCJ as fact-finder where findings are supported by substantial evidence. See DeWitt v. Rent-A-Ctr., Inc., 2009-NMSC-032, ¶ 12, 146 N.M. 453, 212 P.3d 341.

  6. Mendez v. McDonalds

    NO. A-1-CA-37197 (N.M. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2019)

    And ultimately, given the factual nature of the inquiry, as well as the standard of review, we conclude that the WCJ's determination is affirmable. See generally Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926 ("The physical capacity determination . . . is an issue of fact and . . . the fact finder has the prerogative to determine the weight and credibility to be given to testimony and evidence." (citations omitted)).

  7. McCaul v. EAN Holdings LLC

    No. A-1-CA-35061 (N.M. Ct. App. Sep. 11, 2018)

    {9} Worker argues that the WCJ erred in determining there was no unfair claims processing in this case. "All workers' compensation cases are reviewed under a whole record standard of review[,]" Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926, to "determine if there is substantial evidence to support the result[,]" Leonard v. Payday Prof'l, 2007-NMCA-128, ¶ 10, 142 N.M. 605, 168 P.3d 177 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). "We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the decision[.]"

  8. Carbajal v. Plaza Lathing & Plastering, LLC

    NO. A-1-CA-35263 (N.M. Ct. App. Jul. 18, 2018)

    See §§ 52-1-28(B), -49(A); Davis v. Los Alamos Nat'l Lab., 1989-NMCA-023, ¶ 4, 108 N.M. 587, 775 P.2d 1304 ("Claimant has the burden of showing that the [medical] expenses were both reasonable and necessary."); Hernandez v. Mead Foods, Inc., 1986-NMCA-020, ¶ 23, 104 N.M. 67, 716 P.2d 645 (holding that "the medical benefits for which recovery is sought must be incidental to and a concomitant part of the injury sustained in a work-related accident"). {13} We review the WCJ's 2015 Order "under a whole record standard of review." Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. "Whole record review contemplates a canvass by the reviewing court of all the evidence bearing on a finding or decision, favorable and unfavorable, in order to determine if there is substantial evidence to support the result."

  9. Gonzales v. Zen Window Cleaning

    No. A-1-CA-35009 (N.M. Ct. App. Jun. 28, 2018)

    {7} We review factual findings of the WCJ "under a whole record standard of review." Moya v. City of Albuquerque, 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. Under this standard of review, we consider "all the evidence bearing on the WCJ's decision in order to determine if there is substantial evidence to support the result."

  10. Lewis v. Albuquerque Pub. Sch.

    2018 NMCA 49 (N.M. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 2 times

    {16} "All workers' compensation cases are reviewed under a whole record standard of review." Moya v. City of Albuquerque , 2008-NMSC-004, ¶ 6, 143 N.M. 258, 175 P.3d 926. "On appeal, to determine whether a challenged finding is supported by substantial evidence, we have always given deference to the fact[-]finder, even when we apply ... whole record review."