Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Russell v. Industrial Commission, 402 P.2d 561.

50 citing documents.

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
See Russell v. Industrial Comm’n
Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 654 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 654 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Petitioners correctly point out that medical testimony can be so weakened by proof of an inaccurate factual background that the testimony cannot be said to constitute “substantial evidence.” , Barber v. Industrial Commission, 25 Ariz.App.
M. M. Sundt Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 602 P.2d 475 Ariz. 1979
M. M. Sundt Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 602 P.2d 475 Ariz. 1979
Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Industrial Commission 585 P.2d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Industrial Commission 585 P.2d 1247 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
In support of this proposition
Capitol Foundry v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Janis v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 66 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Capitol Foundry v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 69 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Royal Globe Insurance Company v. Industrial Commission, 20 Ariz.App.
Janis v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 66 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
State Compensation Fund v. Industrial Commission 535 P.2d 623 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
State Compensation Fund v. Industrial Commission 535 P.2d 623 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Tatman v. Provincial Homes, 94 * P.2d 573 (1963).”
Royal Globe Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission 513 P.2d 970 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Royal Globe Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission 513 P.2d 970 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
McNeely v. Industrial Commission 501 P.2d 555 Ariz. 1972
McNeely v. Industrial Commission 501 P.2d 555 Ariz. 1972
Benitez v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Benitez v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 1171 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Wones v. Industrial Commission, 7 Ariz.App.
O'Neal v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
O'Neal v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
We have read petitioner’s , ; , , and find them inapplicable.
Scoggins v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 482 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Scoggins v. Industrial Commission 482 P.2d 482 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
this court held: “Second, an industrial injury need not be the sole cause of death, in order to entitle decedent’s dependents to death benefits, as long as it appears that the injury contributed to and accelerated the inevitable.” ’ (emphasis theirs) “ , at 564 (1965).” We find no conflict in the evidence.
Turner v. Industrial Commission 474 P.2d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Turner v. Industrial Commission 474 P.2d 472 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
and Romero v. Industrial Commission, 11 Ariz.App.
Carson v. Industrial Commission 439 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Carson v. Industrial Commission 439 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Our Supreme Court has stated: “Where a worker died from a heart attack, if his activity on the job precipitated the heart attack, or accelerated death, the petitioner meets the burden of proving the causal connection between his employment and the decedent’s death.”
Powell v. Industrial Commission 423 P.2d 348 Ariz. 1967
Powell v. Industrial Commission 423 P.2d 348 Ariz. 1967
Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission 420 P.2d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission 420 P.2d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
this court held: ‘Second, an industrial injury need not be the sole cause of death, in order to entitle decedent’s dependents to death benefits, as long as it appears that the injury contributed to and accelerated the inevitable.’ , at 564 (1965).” Petitioner also relies upon testimony of Doctors Melick and Cohen to the effect that if the pains and rupture of the aneurysm occurred on June 28 the alleged lifting incident of the 29th had little to do with Mr. Hooker’s terminal picture.
Wollum v. Industrial Commission 414 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1966
Wollum v. Industrial Commission 414 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1966
rehearing denied , ; , .
Flannery v. Industrial Commission 412 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Flannery v. Industrial Commission 412 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Thiel v. Industrial Commission, 1 Ariz.App.
Meador v. Industrial Commission 409 P.2d 302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Meador v. Industrial Commission 409 P.2d 302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Eck v. Industrial Commission, 1 Ariz.App.
Moore v. Industrial Commission 406 P.2d 861 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Moore v. Industrial Commission 406 P.2d 861 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Roberts v. Industrial Commission, 1 Ariz.App.
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 875 Ariz. 1965
Baum v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 880 Ariz. 1965
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 875 Ariz. 1965
Phelps Dodge Corporation, Morenci Branch, v. Industrial Commission, , ; , .
Baum v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 880 Ariz. 1965
Phelps Dodge, Morenci Branch, v. Industrial Commission, , ; Graver Tank & Mfg.
Eck v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Eck v. Industrial Commission 405 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Thiel v. Industrial Commission 404 P.2d 711 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Roberts v. Industrial Commission 404 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Thiel v. Industrial Commission 404 P.2d 711 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
this court held: ‘Second, an industrial injury need not be the sole cause of death, in order to entitle decedent’s dependents to death benefits, as long as it appears that the injury contributed to and accelerated the inevitable.’ ” , at 564 (1965).
Roberts v. Industrial Commission 404 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by