Bajart v. Unm, 19-321

Docket Nº19-321
Citation980 P.2d 94
Case DateApril 16, 1999
CourtCourt of Appeals of New Mexico

CHRISTINE BAJART, Worker-Appellant,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO, Employer-Appellee.

CONSOLIDATED WITH

CHRISTINE BAJART and BILL BRADISH, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO, Defendant-Appellee.

Docket Nos. 19,321 and 19,605

Opinion Number: 1999-NMCA-064

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Filing Date: April 16, 1999

APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY
W. C. "Woody" Smith, District Judge and the NEW MEXICO WORKERS' COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATION, Joseph N. Wiltgen, Workers' Compensation Administration Judge

JOSEPH WILLIAM REICHERT, Albuquerque, NM, for Appellants

KATHERINE E. TOUREK, BRADLEY & McCULLOCH, P.A., Albuquerque, NM, for Appellee University of New Mexico

DOUGLAS A. BAKER, MODRALL, SPERLING, ROEHL, HARRIS & SISK, P.A., Albuquerque, NM, for Appellee Board of Regents of University of New Mexico

OPINION

BUSTAMANTE, Judge.

{1} In this consolidated appeal, Christine Bajart (Bajart) appeals the Compensation Order entered by the workers' compensation judge (WCJ), which concluded that Bajart's exclusive remedy was under the Workers' Compensation Act (the Act). See NMSA 1978, §§ 52-1-1 to -70 (1929, as amended through 1993). Bajart also appeals the district court's order, which granted summary judgment against Bajart in her personal injury suit on the grounds of collateral estoppel. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

{2} Bajart was employed as a graduate teaching assistant at the University of New Mexico (UNM) during the 1994-1995 academic year. UNM compensated Bajart for her work with monthly payments and a tuition waiver. In addition to teaching, Bajart worked in the photography darkroom. On April 25, 1995, Bajart attempted to fix a nonfunctioning machine that mixed chemicals used in the darkroom. In so doing, Bajart was injured by a powerful shock.

{3} Between April 25, 1995, and March 17, 1997, Bajart completed a number of workers' compensation forms and reports, and received medical care that was paid for by UNM. On March 17, 1997, Bajart filed a workers' compensation complaint against UNM seeking benefits for permanent partial disability and attorney fees. After a hearing at which testimonial evidence was admitted, the WCJ filed an Order on Status of Claimant, which specifically concluded that Bajart was "estopped from alleging that her claim is not a workers' compensation claim," and that the Act provides Bajart's exclusive remedy. The WCJ later incorporated this order into his March 9, 1998, Compensation Order.

{4} On April 10, 1997, while the workers' compensation proceedings were underway, Bajart and her husband, Bill Bradish, filed a complaint in district court against the Board of Regents of UNM (the Board) seeking damages for personal injury. On January 7, 1998, the Board filed a Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment. This motion, and the memorandum...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Public Service Co. v. DIAMOND D. CONST. CO., No. 21,590.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • August 22, 2001
    ...novo. State v. Shaulis-Powell, 1999-NMCA-090, ¶ 17, 127 N.M. 667, 986 P.2d 463; Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999 NMCA 064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94. Our primary goal in interpreting statutes is to give effect to the legislature's intent. State v. Martinez, 1998-NMSC-023, ¶ 8, 126 N.M. 39......
  • State v. Brothers, No. 22,377.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • September 25, 2002
    ...de novo. See State v. Chorney, 2001-NMCA-050, ¶ 4, 130 N.M. 638, 29 P.3d 538; Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94. A. Completion of a Deferred Sentence Does Not Eradicate a {9} Defendant argues that his record was cleared, as if he had received a condition......
  • Largo v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RY., No. 21,927.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • December 10, 2001
    ...to the other party). {14} The interpretation of statutes is a question of law, Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94, and our goal in interpreting statutes is to determine legislative intent. State v. Shop Rite Foods, Inc., 74 N.M. 55, 57, 390 P.2d 437, 438 ......
  • EDU v. ELDORADO AREA WATER & SANITATION, No. 24,276.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • March 22, 2005
    ...bond issue presents a question of law which we also review de novo. See Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94.s bond resolution. The bond resolution states in pertinent part: The ... Bonds shall constitute the general obligation indebtedness of the District,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Public Service Co. v. DIAMOND D. CONST. CO., No. 21,590.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • August 22, 2001
    ...novo. State v. Shaulis-Powell, 1999-NMCA-090, ¶ 17, 127 N.M. 667, 986 P.2d 463; Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999 NMCA 064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94. Our primary goal in interpreting statutes is to give effect to the legislature's intent. State v. Martinez, 1998-NMSC-023, ¶ 8, 126 N.M. 39......
  • State v. Brothers, No. 22,377.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • September 25, 2002
    ...de novo. See State v. Chorney, 2001-NMCA-050, ¶ 4, 130 N.M. 638, 29 P.3d 538; Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94. A. Completion of a Deferred Sentence Does Not Eradicate a {9} Defendant argues that his record was cleared, as if he had received a condition......
  • Largo v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RY., No. 21,927.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • December 10, 2001
    ...to the other party). {14} The interpretation of statutes is a question of law, Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94, and our goal in interpreting statutes is to determine legislative intent. State v. Shop Rite Foods, Inc., 74 N.M. 55, 57, 390 P.2d 437, 438 ......
  • EDU v. ELDORADO AREA WATER & SANITATION, No. 24,276.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • March 22, 2005
    ...bond issue presents a question of law which we also review de novo. See Bajart v. Univ. of N.M., 1999-NMCA-064, ¶ 7, 127 N.M. 311, 980 P.2d 94.s bond resolution. The bond resolution states in pertinent part: The ... Bonds shall constitute the general obligation indebtedness of the District,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT