Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Stainless Specialty Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial Commission, 695 P.2d 261.

104 citing documents.

Savin v. ica/assisted care/phx. Ins. Co. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Savin v. ica/assisted care/phx. Ins. Co. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Jaeger v. Banner Health Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Jaeger v. Banner Health Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Fonseca v. Dole fresh/dole Food Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Fonseca v. Dole fresh/dole Food Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Comm’n, -20, -69 (1985) (citing Ortega, 121 Ariz. at 557, 592 P.2d at 391).
Southwest Desert Images, LLC v. Industrial Commission 337 P.3d 554 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Southwest Desert Images, LLC v. Industrial Commission 337 P.3d 554 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Lockridge v. Am king/special Fund Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Lockridge v. Am king/special Fund Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Comm’n, –16, 18– 19, –65, 267–68 (1985); see also Modern Indus.
Gary D. Hackworth v. Atlas Copco North America and Liberty Mutual Insurance Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Gary D. Hackworth v. Atlas Copco North America and Liberty Mutual Insurance Group Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Mont Polanco v. Ica Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Mont Polanco v. Ica Pima County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Schuck & Sons Construction v. Industrial Commission 138 P.3d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Schuck & Sons Construction v. Industrial Commission 138 P.3d 1201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Comm’n, , (holding that res judicata does not apply to workers’ compensation cases the same as in general civil cases and will not bar reopening a claim under certain circumstances).
Young v. Industrial Commission 63 P.3d 298 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Young v. Industrial Commission 63 P.3d 298 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Lovitch v. Industrial Commission 41 P.3d 640 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Lovitch v. Industrial Commission 41 P.3d 640 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Comm’n, , Ariz.Rev.Stat.
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
Comm’n, -20 , -69 (1985).
Brown v. Industrial Commission 19 P.3d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
Brown v. Industrial Commission 19 P.3d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
See Stainless Specialty Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
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
which was decided after Gallegos.” 155 Ariz. at 287-88 , 746 P.2d at 28-29 .
Kaibab Industries v. Industrial Commission 2 P.3d 691 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Kaibab Industries v. Industrial Commission 2 P.3d 691 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
Gerhardt v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 889 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Gerhardt v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 889 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
To prevent the harsh consequences of general res judicata principles, the legislature has determined that a claim may be reopened and the need for compensation redetermined when the claimant demonstrates the presence of a “new, additional or previously undiscovered temporary or permanent condition.” -16 , -65 (1985); A.R.S.
Karber/Interstate Air v. Industrial Commission 885 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Karber/Interstate Air v. Industrial Commission 885 P.2d 99 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
Bayless v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 880 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Bayless v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 880 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, -19 , -68 (1985) (“reopening is permissible when a change in physical circumstances or medical evaluation creates a need for treatment, and the legitimacy of that need was not and could not have been adjudicated at the time of the last award.”).
Circle K Corp. v. Industrial Commission 880 P.2d 642 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Circle K Corp. v. Industrial Commission 880 P.2d 642 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
Hopkins v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 859 P.2d 796 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Hopkins v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 859 P.2d 796 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, , (interpreting Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann.
Cigna Health Plan v. Industrial Commission 811 P.2d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Cigna Health Plan v. Industrial Commission 811 P.2d 370 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Industrial Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission 784 P.2d 709 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Industrial Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission 784 P.2d 709 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
See Stainless Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial Comm’n
Post v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 770 P.2d 308 Ariz. 1989
Post v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA 770 P.2d 308 Ariz. 1989
City of Scottsdale v. Industrial Commission 764 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
City of Scottsdale v. Industrial Commission 764 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, , extends to the current case.
Epstein's Custom Carpentry v. Industrial Commission 746 P.2d 25 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Epstein's Custom Carpentry v. Industrial Commission 746 P.2d 25 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Co. v. Industrial Commission, 144 * , entered after Gallegos , further inquiry appears appropriate.
Perry v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 741 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Perry v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 741 P.2d 693 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987