N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 52 / Article 1
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 52-1-26.1 (2026)

Partial disability determination; calculation of

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
modifications.
   A. For the purpose of determining the percentage of disability pursuant to Section
52-1-26 NMSA 1978, impairment shall constitute the base value.

   B. The appropriate values for the age modification, as determined in Section 52-1-
26.2 NMSA 1978, and the education modification, as determined by Section 52-1-26.3
NMSA 1978, shall be added together. If this sum is less than zero, the sum shall be
deemed to be zero for the purposes of this calculation. This sum shall be multiplied by
the appropriate value of the physical capacity modification, determined in Section 52-1-
26.4 NMSA 1978.

   C. The product calculated in Subsection B of this section shall be added to the base
value. This sum represents the percentage of unscheduled partial disability to be
awarded.
History: 1978 Comp., § 52-1-26.1, enacted by Laws 1990 (2nd S.S.), ch. 2, § 12.

                                      ANNOTATIONS

Effective dates. — Laws 1990 (2nd S.S.), ch. 2, § 153 made Laws 1990 (2nd S.S.), ch.
2, § 12 effective January 1, 1991.

Law reviews. — For survey of 1990-91 workers' compensation law, see 22 N.M.L. Rev.
845 (1992).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: Baker v. Endeavor Servs., Inc., 428 P.3d 265 (N.M. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Baker v. Endeavor Servs., Inc., 428 P.3d 265 (N.M. 2018). · cites it 8× “7 {5} Employer accepted these findings and immediately began paying benefits in 8 accordance with the July 22, 2013, MMI date and the 5% WPI rating. Dr.”
Baker v. Endeavor Servs., 2018-NMSC-035. · cites it 4× “{5} Employer accepted these findings and immediately began paying benefits in accordance with the July 22, 2013, MMI date and the 5% WPI rating. Dr. Balkman’s findings had the effect of limiting Worker’s available compensation, paid via PPD, to significantly less than what…”
Cordova v. KSL-Union, 2012-NMCA-083. · cites it 7× “” The WCJ calculated that Worker is permanently partially disabled with a whole body impairment rating of seven percent.”
Leo v. Cornucopia Restaurant, 881 P.2d 714 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “Based on the above facts, pursuant to Section 52-1-26.1, the Judge calculated Claimant’s permanent partial disability rating based on an impairment rating of 5% and a residual physical capacity rating of eight, representing the points assigned by statute, when a worker was doing…”
Salazar v. Torres, 2007-NMSC-019, 158 P.3d 449. · cites it 2× “See §§ 52-1-26.1 to -26.4. These statutory limitations on the benefits allowed will serve as limitations on what the compensation benefits are used for, and will not likely include the payment of legal fees incurred by a worker in pursuing a Delgado claim.”
Madrid v. St. Joseph Hosp., 928 P.2d 250 (N.M. 1996). · cites it 2× “If the worker is not able to return to work at a rate of pay equal to or higher than the pre-injury wages, the workers’ compensation judge applies a statutory formula in order to determine the appropriate level of workers’ compensation benefits.”
Gonzalez v. Performance Painting, Inc., 2013-NMSC-021, 4 N.M. 302. · cites it 8× “NMSA 1978, § 52-1-26.1 (C) (1990). This case illustrates the significance of both benefits, where Worker’s base impairment was only 3 percent, but his modifier benefits added another 48 percent.”
Jeffrey v. Hays Plumbing & Heating, 878 P.2d 1009 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Permanent partial disability shall be determined by calculating the worker’s impairment as modified by his age, education and physical capacity, pursuant to Sections 52-1-26.1 through 52-1-26.4 NMSA 1978; provided that, regardless of the actual calculation of impairment as…”
Rodriguez v. La Mesilla Constr. Co., 1997-NMCA-062, 943 P.2d 136. · cites it 2× “See Section 52-1-26.1 (providing method of calculating PPD level).”
Levario v. Ysidro Villareal Labor Agency, 906 P.2d 266 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). “If, on or after the date of maximum medical improvement, an injured worker returns to work at a wage equal to or greater than the worker’s pre-injury wage, the worker’s permanent partial disability rating shall be equal to his impairment and shall not be subject to the…”
Edmiston v. City of Hobbs, 1997-NMCA-085, 944 P.2d 883. · cites it 2× “Based on these determinations, the WCJ concluded that Worker was entitled to impairment benefits at only 10% based upon the compression fracture alone and was not entitled to any formula points under NMSA 1978, Sections 52-1-26.1 to -26.4 (Repl. Pamp.1991) because her current…”
Gutierrez v. City of Albuquerque, 909 P.2d 732 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “1991) (average weekly wage); § 52-1-26.1 to -26.4 (formula for adding factors to impairment rating); §§ 52-1-41 to -43 (number of weeks of benefits and scheduled injuries).”
Show all 26 citing cases →
N.M. Stat. § 52-1-26.1(A): 3 cases
Hawkins v. McDonald's & Food Indus. Self Ins. Fund, 2014-NMCA-048, 5 N.M. 766.
Hawkins v. McDonald's, 2014-NMCA-048.
Hawkins v. McDonald's, No. 32,635 (N.M. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013).
N.M. Stat. § 52-1-26.1(B): 2 cases
Gonzalez v. Performance Painting, Inc., 2013-NMSC-021, 4 N.M. 302. “NMSA 1978, § 52-1-26.1 (C) (1990). This case illustrates the significance of both benefits, where Worker’s base impairment was only 3 percent, but his modifier benefits added another 48 percent.”
Gonzalez v. Performance Painting, Inc., 2013-NMSC-021.
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.