Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Home Insurance Company v. Industrial Commission, 530 P.2d 1123.

52 citing documents.

C2 enterprises/berkshire v. Monge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
C2 enterprises/berkshire v. Monge Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Roman v. shippers/zurich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Roman v. shippers/zurich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
sun/gallagher v. Bungard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
sun/gallagher v. Bungard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lindquist v. hospice/sentry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lindquist v. hospice/sentry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Comm’n, –94 (1975) (Defining stationary as when “the workman’s physical condition has reached a relatively stable status so that nothing further in the way of medical treatment is indicated to improve that condition.” (internal quotation 3 LINDQUIST v. HOSPICE/SE
Bowen v. hyatt/gallagher Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Bowen v. hyatt/gallagher Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Comm’n, -96, -29 (1975).
Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission 243 P.3d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission 243 P.3d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Comm’n, , (analyzing the “stationary” concept and distinguishing a temporary impairment from a permanent one).
Rosarita Mexican Foods v. Industrial Commission 19 P.3d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Rosarita Mexican Foods v. Industrial Commission 19 P.3d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Cornelson v. Industrial Commission 17 P.3d 114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Cornelson v. Industrial Commission 17 P.3d 114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Comm’n, -95 , -28 (1975) (discussing closure of claim when condition is “stationary”).
Tsosie v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 905 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
Tsosie v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 905 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
The parties’ dispute thus concerns the definition of “stationary.” , that a claimant’s condition is stationary when it “has reached a ‘relatively stable status’ so that nothing further in the way of medical treatment is indicated to improve that condition.” Tsosie, however, contends that the *541 definition adopted by the supreme court in Employers Mut
Hanley v. Industrial Commission 767 P.2d 1193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Hanley v. Industrial Commission 767 P.2d 1193 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Johnson-Manley Lumber v. INDUS. COM'N. 764 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Johnson-Manley Lumber v. INDUS. COM'N. 764 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Jessie's Boat Shop & R v. Repair v. Industrial Commission 746 P.2d 1310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Jessie's Boat Shop & R v. Repair v. Industrial Commission 746 P.2d 1310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Howard P. Foley Co. v. Industrial Commission 729 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Howard P. Foley Co. v. Industrial Commission 729 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Capuano v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 722 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Capuano v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 722 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Regnier v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 707 P.2d 333 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Regnier v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 707 P.2d 333 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Western Cable v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 698 P.2d 759 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Western Cable v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 698 P.2d 759 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Crowley Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 694 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Crowley Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 694 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
From this premise it argues that if one of the combined injuries ceases to be in a stationary condition (i.e., the disability is permanent with no possibility of medical improvement, , ), then the basis of the permanent partial award also ceases.
Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 654 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 654 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
§§ 23-1047(A); 23-1044(F)
Field v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 626 P.2d 155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Field v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 626 P.2d 155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Savage Welding Supplies v. Industrial Commission 587 P.2d 778 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Savage Welding Supplies v. Industrial Commission 587 P.2d 778 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Cardinale v. Industrial Commission 569 P.2d 284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Cardinale v. Industrial Commission 569 P.2d 284 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
ARS § 23-1044(A-C); , , Continental Casualty Co. v. Industrial Commission, 23 Ariz.App.
Sandoval v. Industrial Commission 559 P.2d 688 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Sandoval v. Industrial Commission 559 P.2d 688 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Cheatham v. Industrial Commission 558 P.2d 737 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Cheatham v. Industrial Commission 558 P.2d 737 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Janis v. Industrial Commission 553 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Janis v. Industrial Commission 553 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
we reviewed the statutory and judicial considerations which have given rise to the stationary concept, stating: “In summary, it is our opinion that in deciding whether an injured workman’s condition has become stationary, it is important to keep in mind that the objective is to determine whether
Gould v. Industrial Commission 552 P.2d 457 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Gould v. Industrial Commission 552 P.2d 457 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
§§ 23-1041 et seq., particularly §§ 23-1044, 23-1045, 23-1047 and 23-1061; , and cases cited therein.