Jackson Lewis: New Mexico Appellate Court Affirms Decision Requiring an Employer and Workers' Compensation Carrier to Reimburse an Employee's Medical Marijuana Costs | Practical Law

Jackson Lewis: New Mexico Appellate Court Affirms Decision Requiring an Employer and Workers' Compensation Carrier to Reimburse an Employee's Medical Marijuana Costs | Practical Law

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. discusses the recent New Mexico intermediate appellate court's decision in Vialpando v. Ben's Auto. Servs. and Redwood Fire & Casualty. In that case, an employee who suffered a work-related injury causing chronic ongoing pain was certified to participate in a medical marijuana program under New Mexico's Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act. The workers' compensation judge required the employer and its workers' compensation carrier to reimburse the employee for medical marijuana costs. The appellate court approved the worker's compensation judge's requirement, concluding that medical marijuana is reasonable and necessary under the Workers' Compensation Act and rejecting the argument that reimbursing the employee would violate public policy.

Jackson Lewis: New Mexico Appellate Court Affirms Decision Requiring an Employer and Workers' Compensation Carrier to Reimburse an Employee's Medical Marijuana Costs

by Jackson Lewis P.C.
Published on 23 May 2014New Mexico, United States
This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. discusses the recent New Mexico intermediate appellate court's decision in Vialpando v. Ben's Auto. Servs. and Redwood Fire & Casualty. In that case, an employee who suffered a work-related injury causing chronic ongoing pain was certified to participate in a medical marijuana program under New Mexico's Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act. The workers' compensation judge required the employer and its workers' compensation carrier to reimburse the employee for medical marijuana costs. The appellate court approved the worker's compensation judge's requirement, concluding that medical marijuana is reasonable and necessary under the Workers' Compensation Act and rejecting the argument that reimbursing the employee would violate public policy.