Justices strike down workers’ comp cap for mental disability

State’s high court rules provision that treats impairments differently violates equal protection clause of constitution

The New Mexico Supreme Court on Monday ruled the state’s limits on workers’ compensation benefits for a mental impairment caused by a workplace injury are unconstitutional.

In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Briana Zamora, the court concluded a Workers’ Compensation Act provision violated the equal protection clause of the state constitution because workers with mental impairments were treated differently from employees with physical impairments from a work-related injury.

The high court backed a ruling by the state Court of Appeals in a case involving special education teacher Ana Lilia Cardenas, who developed a mental impairment due to a knee injury sustained while working for Aztec Municipal Schools, according to the opinion.

A Workers’ Compensation Administration judge awarded her 150 weeks of permanent partial disability benefits for the physical injury to her knee, classified as a “scheduled” injury, the opinion states. Benefits for scheduled injuries are capped at 200 weeks, compared with up to 700 weeks of compensation for injuries deemed “nonscheduled.”

While Cardenas’ secondary mental impairment was classified as “non-scheduled,” her compensation for it was limited to the maximum benefit allowed for the initial knee injury. Therefore, the mental condition was not treated as a separate, non-scheduled injury. The justices’ opinion states that under the workers’ compensation law, the benefits for a separate, non-scheduled physical injury that emerged due to the knee injury would not have been tied to an initial physical injury and would have led to up to 700 weeks of benefits for Cardenas.

Cardenas appealed the initial disability award, and the Court of Appeals ruled in her favor. The school district and its insurer asked the Supreme Court to review the decision.

The Supreme Court opinion notes “historical treatment of persons with mental disabilities” and barriers created by prejudice and discrimination.

“The stigma associated with mental illness remains potent,” the opinion states. “People of all ages, cultures, and socioeconomic conditions are adversely affected by this stigma.”

The opinion adds, “Antiquated biases and discriminatory practices continue to impede a person’s access to health care for mental health conditions when no such impediments burden access to health care for medical or surgical conditions. The need for heightened scrutiny of laws that draw distinctions based on mental disabilities clearly persists.”