The payment or award of benefits under the workers' compensation law of another state, territory, province or foreign nation to an employee or his dependents otherwise entitled on account of such injury or death to the benefits of the Workers' Compensation Act shall not be a bar to a claim for benefits under that act; provided that claim under that act is filed within one year after such injury or death. If compensation is paid or awarded under that act:

A. the medical and related benefits furnished or paid for by the employer under such other workers' compensation law on account of such injury or death shall be credited against the medical and related benefits to which the employee would have been entitled under the Workers' Compensation Act had claim been made solely under that act;

B. the total amount of all income benefits paid or awarded the employee under such other workers' compensation law shall be credited against the total amount of income benefits which would have been due the employee under the Workers' Compensation Act had claim been made solely under that act; and

C. the total amount of death benefits paid or awarded under such other workers' compensation law shall be credited against the total amount of death benefits due under the Workers' Compensation Act.

History: 1953 Comp., § 59-10-33.2, enacted by Laws 1975, ch. 241, § 2; 1989, ch. 263, § 41.

Tests for compensation award in one state as bar to award in another. — Whether the payment of benefits under a workmen's (workers') compensation law of another state shall bar the award of supplemental benefits under New Mexico law is dependent upon the application of two tests as enunciated by the United States supreme court: (1) the state first granting an award must announce in unmistakable language, either by statute or judicial decision, that its award is intended to be final and conclusive of all the employee's rights against the employer (and the insurer) growing out of the injury; that the award under its statute is a completely exclusive remedy, precluding a subsequent recovery under the laws of another state, and (2) the award in the first state must be res judicata in that state. Chapman v. John St. John Drilling Co., 1963-NMSC-214, 73 N.M. 261, 387 P.2d 462 (decided under prior law).

Legislative intent to avoid "res judicata" complexities. — It is reasonable to presume that in enacting this section, the legislature intended to avoid the complexities involved in the application of "full faith and credit" and "res judicata" in workmen's (workers') compensation cases. Webb v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 1981-NMCA-007, 95 N.M. 603, 624 P.2d 545.

Benefits neither barred nor offset by receipt of federal benefits. — Workmen's (Workers') compensation benefits awarded under the New Mexico Workmen's (Workers') Compensation Act are not barred or even offset by the receipt of any federal benefits. Clemmer v. Carpenter, 1982-NMCA-098, 98 N.M. 302, 648 P.2d 341, cert. denied, 98 N.M. 336, 648 P.2d 794.

Tolling of period to sue. — Voluntary payment of compensation benefits pursuant to the law of another state is not in itself sufficient to toll the filing requirements of this section; tolling of the time to sue provision depends upon whether a worker was reasonably led to believe that New Mexico compensation would be paid. Ryan v. Bruenger M. Trucking, 1983-NMCA-043, 100 N.M. 15, 665 P.2d 277, cert. denied, 100 N.M. 53, 665 P.2d 809.

Effect of award under another state's statute. — An award made under the workmen's (workers') compensation statute of a state will not bar a proceeding against the same person under the applicable statute of a sister state, unless the first state has declared by statute or by court decision that is remedy, if pursued to an award, should be exclusive. Webb v. Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., 1981-NMCA-007, 95 N.M. 603, 624 P.2d 545.

A worker is not precluded from receiving New Mexico compensation benefits merely because that worker has also received compensation benefits in another state. Cawyer v. Cont'l Express Trucking, 1997-NMCA-008, 122 N.M. 819, 932 P.2d 509.

Under full faith and credit, New Mexico determines case where no res judicata. — In view of the construction of its own judgments by the courts of Texas, the court concludes that the appeal from the award of the Texas industrial accident board by the claimant in this case denies that award the requisite finality to make it res judicata in Texas, and thus the lower New Mexico court was free under the full faith and credit clause to hear and determine the claim to compensation under the New Mexico Workmen's (Workers') Compensation Law. Chapman v. John St. John Drilling Co., 1963-NMSC-214, 73 N.M. 261, 387 P.2d 462 (decided under prior law).

An appeal from judgment prevents its operation as res judicata. Chapman v. John St. John Drilling Co., 1963-NMSC-214, 73 N.M. 261, 387 P.2d 462 (decided under prior law).

Federal question where one state refuses credit to judgment of another. — The effect of a state's prior award under a workmen's (workers') compensation law on the ability of a different state to award supplemental benefits under its own workmen's (workers') compensation statute is a question involving the federal constitution as when a state court refuses credit to the judgment of a sister state because of its opinion of the nature of the cause of action or the judgment in which it is merged, an asserted federal right is denied and the sufficiency of the grounds of denial are for supreme court of the United States to decide. Chapman v. John St. John Drilling Co., 1963-NMSC-214, 73 N.M. 261, 387 P.2d 462 (decided under prior law).

Accepting Texas payments not waiving New Mexico rights. — Claimant did not waive any rights he had under the New Mexico Workers' Compensation Act by accepting compensation payments under the Texas act. Franklin v. Geo. P. Livermore, Inc., 1954-NMSC-054, 58 N.M. 349, 270 P.2d 983 (decided under prior law).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 82 Am. Jur. 2d Workers' Compensation §§ 416, 417.