A. In the event of default in the payment of compensation due under a compensation order, the person to whom compensation is payable may, after the thirtieth day from the date on which the compensation became due and before the lapse of one year from that due date, make application for a supplementary compensation order declaring the amount of compensation in default. The application shall be filed with the director, who shall forthwith notify the employer and the issuer of the filing of the application, giving opportunity to be heard in respect of the application. In the absence of an allegation and proof of fraud in the procurement of the compensation order and if the workers' compensation judge determines that payment of compensation is in default, the workers' compensation judge shall make and file a supplementary compensation order declaring the amount of the compensation in default. In case the payment in default is an installment of an award of determinable amount, the workers' compensation judge may, in his discretion, declare the entire balance of the award due. The claimant or workers' compensation judge may file a certified copy of the supplementary compensation order with the clerk of any district court.
B. The applicant or director may thereafter petition such district court solely for the purposes of entry of judgment upon the supplementary compensation order and the imposition of appropriate sanctions, serving notice of the petition on the employer and any other person in default. If the employer maintains no place of business in the state, he shall be deemed to have appointed the superintendent of insurance as his agent for the purpose of acceptance of service of process in all matters under the Workers' Compensation Act [Chapter 52, Article 1 NMSA 1978] or the New Mexico Occupational Disease Disablement Law [52-3-1 NMSA 1978] or related thereto. The district court shall accept the supplementary compensation order as valid, and shall not review or supplement the findings and conclusions of the workers' compensation judge, other than to enforce the supplementary compensation order and impose appropriate sanctions. The district court shall enter judgment against the person in default for the amount due under the order. No fees shall be required for the filing of a supplementary compensation order, for the petition for judgment, for the entry of judgment or for any enforcement procedure for the judgment. No supersedeas bond shall be granted by any court with respect to a judgment entered under this section.
C. Proceedings to enforce a compensation order or decision shall not be instituted other than as provided by the Workers' Compensation Act or the New Mexico Occupational Disease Disablement Law.
History: Laws 1986, ch. 22, § 36; 1989, ch. 263, § 79; 1990 (2nd S.S.), ch. 2, § 56.
ANNOTATIONSThe 1990 (2nd S.S.) amendment, effective January 1, 1991, in Subsection B, substituted "solely for the purposes of" for "for" and inserted "and the imposition of appropriate sanctions" in the first sentence; substituted "The district court shall accept" for "If the court finds" and inserted "as" and "and shall not review or supplement the findings and conclusions of the workers' compensation judge, other than to enforce the supplementary compensation order and impose appropriate sanctions" in the third sentence; and inserted "district" in the fourth sentence.
Judicial award of attorney fees and expenses. — The legislature intended for a district court that has entered judgment on a Workers' Compensation Division supplemental order to retain jurisdiction for purposes of awarding additional attorney's fees and additional medical expenses. Martinez v. Southwest Moving Specialists, 1990-NMSC-048, 110 N.M. 68, 792 P.2d 45.
Lump-sum settlements. — The workers' compensation administration has continuing jurisdiction over both modification and enforcement of lump-sum settlement agreements. Cruz v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1995-NMSC-006, 119 N.M. 301, 889 P.2d 1223.
Claimant must exercise diligence in prosecuting petition. — Where the state of New Mexico uninsured employers' fund (UEF) filed a 2006 petition with the district court seeking enforcement of a worker's compensation judge's compensation order, where the district court twice-dismissed the petition for lack of prosecution, and where the UEF did not moved to reinstate the petition within the thirty-day period set forth in the district court's second dismissal order, but filed a motion to reinstate the petition in 2015, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the UEF's 2015 motion to reinstate its 2006 petition when six years had passed since the issuance of the 2008 dismissal, because the duty rests upon the claimant at every stage of the proceeding to use diligence to expedite its case, and the UEF failed to diligently prosecute the 2006 petition. N.M. Uninsured Employers' Fund v. Gallegos, 2017-NMCA-044.
Law reviews. — For survey of 1990-91 workers' compensation law, see 22 N.M.L. Rev. 845 (1992).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 82 Am. Jur. 2d Workers' Compensation §§ 668 to 673.
101 C.J.S. Workmen's Compensation §§ 836 to 848.