Cited by

Comm’n, –46, ¶ 12 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, ¶ 4 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, ¶ 12 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12 (App. 2000) (“Claimants bear the burden of establishing all material elements of their claim, including causation and, in IC cases, the necessary connection to a work-related injury.”).3 ¶16 Dr. Zeitzer opined that, within a reasonable degree of medical probability, Petitioner had pre-existin

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12 (App. 2000).

Comm’n of Ariz., ¶ 4 (App. 2000) (“It is true that this Court generally will not consider on appeal issues not raised before the [ICA].

Comm’n, (citing Norsworthy v. Indus.

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12, -50 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12, -50 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12, -50 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, ¶ 4 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, -46, ¶ 12, -50 (App. 2000); Spears v. Indus.

Comm’n, ¶ 4 (App. 2000).

Comm’n, ¶ 4, (noting “this Court generally will not consider on appeal issues not raised before the [Industrial Commission]”).

Comm’n, ¶ 4, (noting “this Court generally will not consider on appeal issues not raised before the I[ndustrial Commission]”).

Comm'n of Ariz., ¶ 4 , (“[Tjhis Court generally will not consider on appeal issues not raised before the IC.”); Teller v. Indus.

Comm’n, (purpose of waiver rule to “give the ALJ the opportunity to correct any legal error”).