Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Serrano v. Industrial Commission, 256 P.2d 709.

32 citing documents.

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
1 A. Larson, supra, at § 16.20.
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.
Robarge v. Bechtel Power Corp. 640 P.2d 211 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Robarge v. Bechtel Power Corp. 640 P.2d 211 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
397, 399-400 , -369 (1976); See also
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
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
See generally Serrano v. Industrial Comm’n, , Kobe v. Industrial Accident Comm’n, 35 Cal.2d 33 , Schademann v. Casey, 194 Neb.
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
Kerr v. Industrial Commission 530 P.2d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Kerr v. Industrial Commission 530 P.2d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
1 Larson, § 16.09 at 4-86.
Pauley v. Industrial Commission 508 P.2d 1160 Ariz. 1973
Pauley v. Industrial Commission 508 P.2d 1160 Ariz. 1973
Ebasco Services, , , -522
Basinger v. Industrial Commission 486 P.2d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Basinger v. Industrial Commission 486 P.2d 802 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
See, , ; , Butler v. Industrial Commission, supra.
Boone v. Industrial Commission 472 P.2d 490 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Boone v. Industrial Commission 472 P.2d 490 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
wherein it was held that an employee who received compensation in order to travel to and from a job and who was injured in doing so was injured within the course of his employment and entitled to benefits under the Act.
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
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, , .
Posey v. Industrial Commission 350 P.2d 659 Ariz. 1960
Sheridan v. Industrial Commission 327 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1958
Sheridan v. Industrial Commission 327 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1958
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, ; , .
Hughes v. Duluth-Superior Transit Co. 78 N.W.2d 56 Minn. 1956
Ebasco Services, Inc. v. Bajbek 284 P.2d 459 Ariz. 1955
Ebasco Services, Inc. v. Bajbek 284 P.2d 459 Ariz. 1955
the court expressly excluded the idea of “time” as being the test, but that the test was whether he was being compensated for travel, and whether the accident occurred as a risk incidental to the travel, while petitioner contends that the Serrano case, supra, does not apply to these facts because afte
Martin v. Industrial Commission 257 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1953
Martin v. Industrial Commission 257 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1953
Upon these facts and the inferences raised therefrom the commission made its finding that decedent “did not sustain a personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.” This court has in prior opinions set forth the meaning of these terms, , .