Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Magma Copper Company v. Industrial Commission, 395 P.2d 616.

28 citing documents.

Hoppin v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZ. 692 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Hoppin v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZ. 692 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Dean v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 554 Ariz. 1976
Dean v. Industrial Commission 551 P.2d 554 Ariz. 1976
See , Sproul v. Industrial Commission, supra
Dickerson v. Industrial Commission 516 P.2d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Dickerson v. Industrial Commission 516 P.2d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Phelps-Dodge Corporation
Sutton v. Industrial Commission 493 P.2d 501 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Sutton v. Industrial Commission 493 P.2d 501 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
See, , , (the Davis court speaks in terms of “future earning capacity”)
Magma Copper Co. v. Industrial Commission 488 P.2d 484 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Magma Copper Co. v. Industrial Commission 488 P.2d 484 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
ollowing cases have been called to our attention: , , Vinson v. Industrial *282 Commission, , , Magma Copper Company v. Industrial Commission, of Arizona, 96 Ariz., 341 , and the Talley case relied upon by the hearing officer.
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
Valdon v. Industrial Commission 447 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1968
Valdon v. Industrial Commission 447 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1968
The findings of the Industrial Commission, as trier of the facts, must be sustained if the Commission’s findings are reasonably supported by the evidence, Magma Copper Co. v. Ind.Comm., 96 Ariz. *551 341, ; Phelps Dodge Corporation, Morenci Branch v. Ind.
Patton v. Paradise Hills Shopping Center, Inc. 417 P.2d 382 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Patton v. Paradise Hills Shopping Center, Inc. 417 P.2d 382 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Wollum v. Industrial Commission 414 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1966
Wollum v. Industrial Commission 414 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1966
We said, , : “It is fundamental that in review by certiorari in this type of proceeding, this Court does not weigh the testimony or resolve conflicts therein; it only searches the record to see whether the Commission’s findings are reasonably supported by the evidence.
Womack v. Industrial Commission 412 P.2d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Womack v. Industrial Commission 412 P.2d 71 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1966
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 408 P.2d 406 Ariz. 1965
Shroyer v. Industrial Commission 408 P.2d 406 Ariz. 1965
in defining earning capacity of a disabled man, we said the object “is to determine as nearly as possible whether in a competitive labor market the subject in his injured condition can probably sell his services and for how much.” In making such a determination the commission may not consider solely t
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.
Russell v. Industrial Commission 402 P.2d 561 Ariz. 1965
Russell v. Industrial Commission 402 P.2d 561 Ariz. 1965