Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Hahn v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA, 252 P.3d 1036.

17 citing documents.

Vande Krol v. superstition/benchmark Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Vande Krol v. superstition/benchmark Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Comm’n, ¶ 10 (App. 2011).
Parr v. united/valeey Forge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Comm’n, ¶ 9 (App. 2011).
Forbach v. flagstaff/copperpoint Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Gilbert Aguirre Jr v. ica/city of Goodyear Ariz. 2019
Comm’n, ¶ 12 (App. 2011) (holding that in making a claim for occupational diseases under § 23-901.01, a claimant must “demonstrate that at least one carcinogen he was exposed to during hazardous duty is reasonably related” to his medical condition).
Aguirre v. Indus. Comm'n of Ariz. 445 P.3d 1040 Ariz. 2019
Comm'n , , 75 ¶ 12, , 1039 (App. 2011) (holding that in making a claim for occupational diseases under § 23-901.01, a claimant must "demonstrate that at least one carcinogen he was exposed to during hazardous duty is reasonably related" to his medical condition).
Aguirre v. goodyear/copperpoint 432 P.3d 946 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Comm’n, ¶ 12 (App. 2011) (emphasis added).
Wildeman v. sofrita/hartford Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Comm'n, ¶ 5 (App. 2011).
Landon v. Industrial Commission 375 P.3d 86 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Comm’n, ¶ 7 (App. 2011) (internal quotations omitted).
Pierce v. allstate/copperpt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Comm’n, ¶ 9, (citation omitted).
Tessler v. Progressive Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Comm’n, ¶ 5 (App. 2011) (citing State Comp.
Ernie Luna Jr. v. Pima County and Tristar Risk Management 341 P.3d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Charles W. Stenz v. City of Tucson and Pinnacle Risk Management Services 336 P.3d 737 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Comm’n, , , 1038 (App.2011).
City of Tucson and Pinnacle Risk Management v. Scott Woodworth 335 P.3d 1131 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Julie Munoz v. Sonic Restaurants 10 and Hartford Accident & indemnity/gallagher Bassett 318 P.3d 439 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Henderson-Jones v. Industrial Commission 310 P.3d 976 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Comm’n, ¶ 7 , , 1038 (App.2011) (explaining that a “liberal construction” does not always produce a “generous interpretation” because we are “constrained by the plain language” of the statutes).
Special Events Service, Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Roberto Dominguez 266 P.3d 358 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011