Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Martin v. Industrial Commission, 257 P.2d 596.

42 citing documents.

Hypl v. Cps, Inc. for Leased Workers Corexpress Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
Hypl v. Cps, Inc. for Leased Workers Corexpress Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
¶8 The following year, in an unrelated case that coincidentally involved the same name, P.2d 596 (1953).
Circle K Store 1131 v. Industrial Commission 796 P.2d 893 Ariz. 1990
Circle K Store 1131 v. Industrial Commission 796 P.2d 893 Ariz. 1990
See, e.g., Martin v. Industrial Comm’n, , Martin v. Industrial Comm’n, , State Comp.
Konichek v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 806 P.2d 885 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
Konichek v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 806 P.2d 885 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
1 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen’s Compensation § 10.32 at 3-100 (1989)
Bennett v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 789 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Bennett v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 789 P.2d 401 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
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
Id., § 10.32, at 3-100, quoted with approval in, e.g., Martin v. Industrial Comm’n, , see also Martin v. Industrial Comm’n, , State Compensation Fund v. Delgadillo, 14 Ariz.App.
State Compensation Fund v. Mohrman 503 P.2d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
State Compensation Fund v. Mohrman 503 P.2d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Dabbs v. Industrial Commission, 2 Ariz.App.
Carlson v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 887 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Carlson v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 887 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
State Compensation Fund v. Delgadillo, 14 Ariz.App.
State Compensation Fund v. Delgadillo 482 P.2d 491 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
State Compensation Fund v. Delgadillo 482 P.2d 491 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
(not the same Martin), discussed at some length the application of this rule, pointing out that this rebuttable presumption can only be invoked in a case where there is an absence of any evidence of what caused the death.
INT'L METAL PRODUCTS v. Industrial Com'n 436 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
International Metal Products Division of McGraw Edison Co. v. Industrial Commission 436 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
INT'L METAL PRODUCTS v. Industrial Com'n 436 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
International Metal Products Division of McGraw Edison Co. v. Industrial Commission 436 P.2d 935 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Dabbs v. Industrial Commission, 2 Ariz.App.
McKay v. Industrial Commission 433 P.2d 32 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
McKay v. Industrial Commission 433 P.2d 32 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Dabbs v. Industrial Commission, 2 Ariz.App.
Powell v. Industrial Commission 423 P.2d 348 Ariz. 1967
Powell v. Industrial Commission 423 P.2d 348 Ariz. 1967
Graham v. Vegetable Oil Products Company 401 P.2d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Graham v. Vegetable Oil Products Company 401 P.2d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Ft. Mohave Farms, Inc. v. Dunlap 393 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1964
Ft. Mohave Farms, Inc. v. Dunlap 393 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1964
McGee v. San Manuel Copper Corporation 360 P.2d 1024 Ariz. 1961
McGee v. San Manuel Copper Corporation 360 P.2d 1024 Ariz. 1961
Ocean Accident & , 255 P. 598 ; , ; , ; , .
Sheridan v. Industrial Commission 327 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1958
Sheridan v. Industrial Commission 327 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1958
This court has in prior opinions set forth the meaning of the phrase “arising out of and in the course of his employment.” ' “ * * * it is sufficient to say that the phrase ‘arising out of’ refers to the origin or cause of the injury and the phrase ‘in the course of’ refers to the time, place, and circumstances of the accident.” , at page 409, ; , .
Smith v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 308 P.2d 698 Ariz. 1957
White v. Industrial Commission 309 P.2d 250 Ariz. 1957
White v. Industrial Commission 309 P.2d 250 Ariz. 1957
Smith v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 308 P.2d 698 Ariz. 1957
Muchmore v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 306 P.2d 272 Ariz. 1957
Muchmore v. Industrial Commission of Arizona 306 P.2d 272 Ariz. 1957
Estate of Wainola v. Ristolainen 289 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1955
Estate of Wainola v. Ristolainen 289 P.2d 692 Ariz. 1955
Inspiration Consolidated Copper Company v. Smith 280 P.2d 273 Ariz. 1955
Sherrill & La Follette v. Herring 279 P.2d 907 Ariz. 1955