Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Allen v. Industrial Commission, 347 P.2d 710.

102 citing documents.

Arizona Public Service Co. v. Industrial Commission 492 P.2d 1212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Arizona Public Service Co. v. Industrial Commission 492 P.2d 1212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
While it is logical, and well established in Arizona law that evidence as to post-injury earnings creates a presumption that the injured workman has an earning capacity equal to the amount of these post-injury earnings, , under certain circumstances post-injury wages considered by themselves may be a quite unreliable indicator of post-injury earning capacity.
Corr v. Industrial Commission 490 P.2d 841 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Corr v. Industrial Commission 490 P.2d 841 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
- ' ' *15 The Arizona Supreme Court, , (related opinion at , ), discussed factors to be considered in determining changes in earning capacity: “[P]ost-injury earnings are not the only factor to be considered in determining whether there is any reduced earning capacity, although the fact of such earnings
Matson v. Industrial Commission 489 P.2d 858 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Matson v. Industrial Commission 489 P.2d 858 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
196 , but such evidence is not necessarily conclusive or controlling, , , , that the Commission may not base the earning capacity solely upon what a worker is receiving in his last employment when t
Houser v. Industrial Commission 489 P.2d 878 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Houser v. Industrial Commission 489 P.2d 878 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Ihle v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Edwards v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Edwards v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
: “There is no question but that the findings of the Commission should be affirmed if supported by competent evidence.
Ihle v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Hoffman v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 493 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Hoffman v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 493 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
State Compensation Fund v. Cramer 474 P.2d 462 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State Compensation Fund v. Cramer 474 P.2d 462 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
477 , ; but, sucli evidence is not necessarily conclusive or controlling
Milam v. Industrial Commission 470 P.2d 113 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Milam v. Industrial Commission 470 P.2d 113 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
to sustain his position that he is entitled to compensation for scheduled injuries under A.R.S.
State Comp. Fund v. GARCIA AND INDUSTRIAL COM'N 467 P.2d 84 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State Comp. Fund v. GARCIA AND INDUSTRIAL COM'N 467 P.2d 84 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
admonished the Commission that proceedings before it are not adversary proceedings and that it is as much the duty of the Commission to encourage and evaluate proper claims fairly as it is to expose and reject improper claims.
Sims v. Industrial Commission 460 P.2d 1003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Sims v. Industrial Commission 460 P.2d 1003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Turley v. Industrial Commission 455 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Turley v. Industrial Commission 455 P.2d 470 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
$1.50 per hour would be a reasonable wage to pay other persons “ , applicable.
Lugar v. Industrial Commission 449 P.2d 61 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Lugar v. Industrial Commission 449 P.2d 61 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
admonished the Commission that proceedings before it are not adversary proceedings and that it is as much the duty of the Commission to encourage and evaluate proper claims fairly as it is to expose and reject improper claims.
Lamb v. Industrial Commission 448 P.2d 425 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Lamb v. Industrial Commission 448 P.2d 425 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
No less is required if the Commission is to fulfill its duty 'to ascertain the substantial rights of the parties and to carry out the spirit’ of the statute which it has the responsibility to administer.”
Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission 447 P.2d 569 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission 447 P.2d 569 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
McDaniel v. Industrial Commission 445 P.2d 860 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
McDaniel v. Industrial Commission 445 P.2d 860 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Maness v. Industrial Commission 434 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1967
Maness v. Industrial Commission 434 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1967
Martin v. Industrial Commission 422 P.2d 178 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Martin v. Industrial Commission 422 P.2d 178 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
The petitioner’s reduced earning capacity must be evaluated realistically from the facts in evidence
Rodgers v. Sunnyside High School District No. 12 415 P.2d 112 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Rodgers v. Sunnyside High School District No. 12 415 P.2d 112 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Carr v. Industrial Commission 408 P.2d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Carr v. Industrial Commission 408 P.2d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Nor did the Commission adequately consider the policy of the employer to retain at their previous wages all employees disabled as the result of on-the-job injuries.” , , (1959).
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 875 Ariz. 1965
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 875 Ariz. 1965
which involved a policy of an employer to keep on injured employees, in which this court found that the Commission erred in determining that claimant was *392 not entitled to permanent compensation because he had not suffered a loss in earning capacity, and set aside the award.
Magma Copper Company v. Industrial Commission 395 P.2d 616 Ariz. 1964
Magma Copper Company v. Industrial Commission 395 P.2d 616 Ariz. 1964
Allen v. Industrial Commission 377 P.2d 201 Ariz. 1962
Allen v. Industrial Commission 377 P.2d 201 Ariz. 1962
Barnard v. Industrial Commission 368 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1962
Barnard v. Industrial Commission 368 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1962
Thus, in 2 Larson, Workmen’s Compensation, § 57.34 (1952), it is stated: ‘Wages paid an injured employee out of sympathy, or in consideration of his long service with the employer, clearly do not reflect his actual earning capacity, and, for purposes of determining permanent disability are to be discounted accordingly.’ ”
Phelps Dodge Corp., Morenci Br. v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N 367 P.2d 270 Ariz. 1961
Phelps Dodge Corp., Morenci Br. v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N 367 P.2d 270 Ariz. 1961