Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Strauss v. Industrial Commission, 240 P.2d 550.

36 citing documents.

Gurtler v. Industrial Commission 354 P.3d 414 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Gurtler v. Industrial Commission 354 P.3d 414 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Comm’n, , (“As a general proposition, the liability of an employer ceases when the employee leaves the premises where he is employed.”).
Torres v. Industrial Commission 670 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Torres v. Industrial Commission 670 P.2d 423 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Fisher Contracting Co. v. Industrial Commission, 27 Ariz.App.
Brooks v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZONA 664 P.2d 690 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Brooks v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZONA 664 P.2d 690 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
1 Larson, supra, § 16.20.
Driscoll v. Harmon 601 P.2d 1051 Ariz. 1979
Driscoll v. Harmon 601 P.2d 1051 Ariz. 1979
J. D. Dutton, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 584 P.2d 1190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
J. D. Dutton, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 584 P.2d 1190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Strauss v. Industrial Comm’n, , Fisher Contracting Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, , State Compensation Fund v. Kempainen, 12 Ariz.App.
Gurovich v. Industrial Commission 556 P.2d 1131 Ariz. 1976
Gurovich v. Industrial Commission 556 P.2d 1131 Ariz. 1976
Ortega v. Ed Horrell & Son, P.2d 744 (1961).
Fisher Contracting Co. v. Industrial Commission 555 P.2d 366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Fisher Contracting Co. v. Industrial Commission 555 P.2d 366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Kriese v. Industrial Commission 554 P.2d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Kriese v. Industrial Commission 554 P.2d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
For a fact situation wherein .the Court found that the employer-furnished automobile, together with other facts, required compensability
DuHamell v. Industrial Commission 510 P.2d 62 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
DuHamell v. Industrial Commission 510 P.2d 62 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
345 , , State Compensation Fund v. Kempainen, 12 Ariz.App.
Anderson v. Gobea 501 P.2d 453 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Anderson v. Gobea 501 P.2d 453 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
State Compensation Fund v. Kempainen 472 P.2d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State Compensation Fund v. Kempainen 472 P.2d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
City of Phoenix v. Industrial Commission 449 P.2d 291 Ariz. 1969
City of Phoenix v. Industrial Commission 449 P.2d 291 Ariz. 1969
There are exceptions, such as where the employee’s actual’ services commence when he leaves home and continue until his return home, , ; where the employee is performing a special mission for his employer, , ; and where the employer furnishes transportation or compensates the employee for his travel time to and from work, , 256 P.2
Malinski v. Industrial Commission 439 P.2d 485 Ariz. 1968
Malinski v. Industrial Commission 439 P.2d 485 Ariz. 1968
Dunlap v. Industrial Commission 363 P.2d 600 Ariz. 1961
Dunlap v. Industrial Commission 363 P.2d 600 Ariz. 1961
Posey v. Industrial Commission 350 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1960
Martin v. Industrial Commission 257 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1953
Serrano v. Industrial Commission 256 P.2d 709 Ariz. 1953
Serrano v. Industrial Commission 256 P.2d 709 Ariz. 1953
Voehl v. Indemnity Insurance Co., 288 U.S. 162 , 53 S.Ct.
Delk v. Industrial Commission 249 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1952
Delk v. Industrial Commission 249 P.2d 943 Ariz. 1952
Again, , , wherein the fact situation revealed that the employee was injured while traveling in line of duty and that the accident occurred five blocks north of where he would have been had he taken the most direct route home, we held: “The question which now presents itself is, did the employee enlarge the
Cavness v. Industrial Commission 243 P.2d 459 Ariz. 1952
Cavness v. Industrial Commission 243 P.2d 459 Ariz. 1952
Strauss v. Industrial Commission, Ariz., ; , ; 71 C. J. 712; 58 Am.Jur., Workmen’s Compensation, § 217.