New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 52-3-8 (2026)

Right to compensation; exclusive when.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
   The right to the compensation provided for in this act, in lieu of any other liability
whatsoever, to any and all persons whomsoever, for any disablement from occupational
disease or death resulting therefrom, shall obtain in all cases where the following
conditions occur:

   A. where at the time of disablement both employer and employee are subject to the
provisions of this act; and where the employer has complied with the provisions hereof
regarding insurance;

    B. where at the time of disablement the employee is performing service arising out
of and in the course of his employment;

     C. where the disablement or death is proximately caused by an occupational
disease arising out of and in the course of his employment, and is not intentionally self-
inflicted.

History: 1941 Comp., § 57-1107, enacted by Laws 1945, ch. 135, § 7; 1953 Comp., §
59-11-7.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

Compiler’s notes. — For the meaning of "this act", see 52-3-1 NMSA 1978 and the
compiler’s notes thereto.

Disease contracted from pigeons roosting in warehouse. — Where worker was
injured and died from psittacosis which worker contracted from exposure to pigeons and
pigeon feces in the warehouse where worker was employed as a laborer, while worker
was performing the duties that were assigned to worker by the employer during work
hours; and there was no evidence that pigeons or psittacosis were incidental to the
character of the employer’s oilfield supply business or businesses that employ people in
warehouses, psittacosis was not a natural incident of employment in the warehouse and
worker’s injury and death did not fall within the exclusivity provisions of the occupational
disease disablement law. Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012-NMCA-085, 285
P.3d 1072, cert. denied, 2012-NMCERT-007.

Receipt of retirement benefits would not prevent a workman (worker) from receiving
occupational disease benefits if disablement has been established. Salazar v. Kaiser
Steel Corp., 1973-NMCA-068, 85 N.M. 254, 511 P.2d 580 (Ct. App.), cert. denied, 85
N.M. 229, 511 P.2d 555.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 30 C.J.S. Employers' Liability §§ 4 to
11.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2012–2012 · leading case: Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012 NMCA 85 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012).
Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012 NMCA 85 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-32 (1989) states what is required to establish causation: The occupational diseases defined in [NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-33 (1973)] shall be deemed to arise out of the employment only if there is a direct causal connection between the conditions under…”
Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012 NMCA 085 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-32 (1989) states what is required to establish causation: The occupational diseases defined in [NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-33 (1973)] shall be deemed to arise out of the employment only if there is a direct causal connection between the conditions under…”
— N.M. Stat. § 52-3-8(C) — 2 cases
Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012 NMCA 85 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012). “NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-32 (1989) states what is required to establish causation: The occupational diseases defined in [NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-33 (1973)] shall be deemed to arise out of the employment only if there is a direct causal connection between the conditions under…”
Castillo v. Caprock Pipe & Supply, Inc., 2012 NMCA 085 (N.M. Ct. App. 2012). “NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-32 (1989) states what is required to establish causation: The occupational diseases defined in [NMSA 1978, Section 52-3-33 (1973)] shall be deemed to arise out of the employment only if there is a direct causal connection between the conditions under…”
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.