AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Worker suffered two compensable injuries to his lumbar spine while employed with Riley Industrial, leading to temporary disability and entitlement to permanent partial disability and ongoing medical care. The Worker's authorized healthcare provider (HCP), Dr. Reeve, included medical marijuana in the Worker's treatment plan for chronic back pain, despite not prescribing it in the traditional sense. The Worker's participation in the medical marijuana program was certified by Dr. Reeve as required by the Compassionate Use Act, although Dr. Reeve clarified he did not advocate for or recommend medical marijuana use but would sign for it if requested by the patient (paras 4-5, 13-17).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Worker-Appellant: Argued that medical marijuana was a reasonable and necessary medical care based on the evidence that the HCP’s treatment plan included medical marijuana and both the HCP and another doctor had certified the Worker’s use of medical marijuana as required by the Compassionate Use Act (para 2).
• Employer/Insurer-Appellees: Contended that medical marijuana was not reasonable and necessary medical care from an authorized HCP, as the HCP did not prescribe medical marijuana to the Worker (para 5).

Legal Issues

• Whether the workers' compensation judge erred in concluding that medical marijuana was not reasonable and necessary medical care for the Worker (para 2).
• Whether substantial evidence supports the workers' compensation judge’s conclusion that medical marijuana was not reasonable and necessary medical care (para 3).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico reversed the workers' compensation judge’s compensation order, finding that there was not substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that medical marijuana was not reasonable and necessary medical care for the Worker (para 3).

Reasons

• The Court, per Judge James J. Wechsler, with Judges Cynthia A. Fry and Michael E. Vigil concurring, found that the workers' compensation judge's conclusion was based on a faulty premise that Dr. Reeve did not prescribe medical marijuana to the Worker. The Court clarified that the certification required under the Compassionate Use Act by a licensed professional in New Mexico to prescribe and administer controlled substances is the functional equivalent of a prescription. The Court determined that the evidence as a whole did not support the conclusion that medical marijuana was not reasonable medical care for the Worker, noting that Dr. Reeve had treated the Worker with traditional pain management that had failed and adopted a treatment plan based on medical marijuana. The Court also found that the evidence clearly established that medical marijuana was necessary for the Worker's treatment because traditional pain management had failed and Dr. Reeve had adopted medical marijuana as his treatment plan. The Court concluded that substantial evidence in the record as a whole did not support the workers' compensation judge’s conclusion that medical marijuana was not reasonable and necessary medical care, leading to the reversal of the compensation order (paras 11, 18-30).