Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Royall v. Industrial Commission, 476 P.2d 156.

108 citing documents.

Circle K Store 1131 v. Industrial Commission 785 P.2d 80 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Circle K Store 1131 v. Industrial Commission 785 P.2d 80 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Royall v. Industrial Comm’n
Murphy v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 774 P.2d 221 Ariz. 1989
Murphy v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 774 P.2d 221 Ariz. 1989
Royall v. Industrial Comm’n, , Peter Kiewit Sons’ Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
Finnegan v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 755 P.2d 413 Ariz. 1988
Finnegan v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 755 P.2d 413 Ariz. 1988
Stephenson v. Industrial Commission, 23 Ariz.App.
P.B. Bell & Associates v. Industrial Commission 690 P.2d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
P.B. Bell & Associates v. Industrial Commission 690 P.2d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Hansen v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 685 P.2d 1342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Hansen v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 685 P.2d 1342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Estate of Sims v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 673 P.2d 310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Estate of Sims v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 673 P.2d 310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Scheller v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 656 P.2d 1279 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Scheller v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 656 P.2d 1279 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Special Fund of the Industrial Commission v. Catalina Trucking Co. 658 P.2d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Special Fund of the Industrial Commission v. Catalina Trucking Co. 658 P.2d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Johnson Stewart Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission 652 P.2d 163 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Johnson Stewart Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission 652 P.2d 163 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Food Products Corp. v. Industrial Commission 630 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Food Products Corp. v. Industrial Commission 630 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Greenlaw Jewelers v. Industrial Commission 621 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Greenlaw Jewelers v. Industrial Commission 621 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. Industrial Commission, 126 Ariz.App.
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission 614 P.2d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission 614 P.2d 851 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Anderson Clayton & Co. v. Industrial Commission 607 P.2d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Anderson Clayton & Co. v. Industrial Commission 607 P.2d 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Peetz v. Industrial Commission 604 P.2d 255 Ariz. 1979
Peetz v. Industrial Commission 604 P.2d 255 Ariz. 1979
Peetz v. Industrial Commission 604 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Peetz v. Industrial Commission 604 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Knoop v. Industrial Commission 589 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Knoop v. Industrial Commission 589 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
: A compensable injury must both “arise out of” the employment and be sustained “in the course of” the employment.
Epperson v. Industrial Commission 549 P.2d 247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Epperson v. Industrial Commission 549 P.2d 247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Downes v. Industrial Commission 546 P.2d 826 Ariz. 1976
Downes v. Industrial Commission 546 P.2d 826 Ariz. 1976
Zambonini v. Industrial Commission 544 P.2d 710 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Zambonini v. Industrial Commission 544 P.2d 710 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Casson v. Industrial Commission 539 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Casson v. Industrial Commission 539 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
In the case of City of Phoenix v. Industrial Commission [ , ], cited in Royall, supra [ , ], the court stated: “ ‘The causative danger must be peculiar to the work [.
Bernard v. Industrial Commission 536 P.2d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Bernard v. Industrial Commission 536 P.2d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
ofore rigid jurisdictional time limits, , , , and in light of the remedial nature of the Workmen’s Compensation Law generally, , Camis v. The Industrial Commission of Arizona, 4 Ariz.App.
Stephenson v. Industrial Commission 533 P.2d 1161 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Stephenson v. Industrial Commission 533 P.2d 1161 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
In Pauley, supra, , which, although involving another allied area, the “personal comfort” rule, and not involving any question of employer’s premises as such, is instructive of the underlying foundation for all of these doctrines: “ ‘[T]he source of injury was sufficiently associated with the employment as to consti
Stoddard v. Industrial Commission 532 P.2d 177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Stoddard v. Industrial Commission 532 P.2d 177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Application of Barrett, , McCampbell v. Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks, , .
Hunley v. Industrial Commission 531 P.2d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Hunley v. Industrial Commission 531 P.2d 552 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Peter Kiewit Sons’ , Sears, Roebuck & , , , 96 P.
Pottinger v. Industrial Commission 527 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
Pottinger v. Industrial Commission 527 P.2d 1232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
145 , vacated on other grounds in , wherein claimant, while on a paid coffee break in employer’s cafeteria, *393 tripped over another person on her way to make a personal telephone call, as an externally caused injury which was in critical contrast to the self-contained degenerative condition of the applicant in Sacks.