In any malpractice claim where the panel has determined that the acts complained of were or reasonably might constitute malpractice and that the patient was or may have been injured by the act, the panel, its members, the director and the professional association concerned will cooperate fully with the patient in retaining a physician qualified in the field of medicine involved, who will consult with, assist in trial preparation and testify on behalf of the patient, upon his payment of a reasonable fee to the same effect as if the physician had been engaged originally by the patient. History: 1953 Comp., § 58-33-23, enacted by Laws 1976, ch. 2, § 23. ANNOTATIONSEmergency clauses. — Laws 1976, ch. 2, § 32 contained an emergency clause and was approved February 27, 1976. Law reviews. — For article, 'Medical Malpractice Legislation in New Mexico,' see 7 N.M.L. Rev. 5 (1976-77). Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 31A Am. Jur. 2d Expert and Opinion Evidence §§ 19, 20, 40. Necessity of expert evidence to support an action for malpractice against a physician or surgeon, 81 A.L.R.2d 597. and C.J.S. references. — 31A Am. Jur. 2d Expert and Opinion Evidence §§ 19, 20, 40. Necessity of expert evidence to support an action for malpractice against a physician or surgeon, 81 A.L.R.2d 597. Competency of general practitioner to testify as expert witness in action against specialist for medical malpractice, 31 A.L.R.3d 1163. Competence of physician or surgeon from one locality to testify, in malpractice case, as to standard of care required of defendant practicing in another locality, 37 A.L.R.3d 420. Necessity and sufficiency of expert evidence to establish existence and extent of physician's duty to inform patient of risks of proposed treatment, 52 A.L.R.3d 1084.
New Mexico Legal Code