Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite McKay v. Industrial Commission, 438 P.2d 757.

183 citing documents.

Hosogai v. Kadota 700 P.2d 1354 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Hosogai v. Kadota 700 P.2d 1354 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Burch & Cracchiolo, P.A. v. Pugliani 697 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Burch & Cracchiolo, P.A. v. Pugliani 697 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Gibson v. Boyle 679 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Gibson v. Boyle 679 P.2d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
(disaffirming of prior decisions of a state's highest court is a question to be addressed only by that court).
In Re Marriage of Berger 680 P.2d 1217 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
In Re Marriage of Berger 680 P.2d 1217 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz. v. Vagnozzi 644 P.2d 1309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz. v. Vagnozzi 644 P.2d 1309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
Vital v. Johnson 624 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Vital v. Johnson 624 P.2d 326 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Soltes v. Jarzynka 621 P.2d 933 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Byrer is so explicit in its articulation of both the necessity and reason for a , for us to entertain the present appeal.
R. G. Roth Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 613 P.2d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
R. G. Roth Construction Co. v. Industrial Commission 613 P.2d 307 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Shell Oil Company v. Christie 607 P.2d 21 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
Shell Oil Company v. Christie 607 P.2d 21 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
Aside from the problem of whether such a course would require disaffirmance of Arizona Supreme Court precedent, a question reserved to that court, , we believe the thicket of contribution schemes and their ramifications, recognized in Wenatchee Wenoka Growers Assn. v. Krack Corporation, 89 Wash.2d 847 , would be best entered, if at all, by the legislature.
Driscoll v. Harmon 601 P.2d 1051 Ariz. 1979
Buhler v. Adkins 607 P.2d 970 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Jackson v. Industrial Commission 592 P.2d 1258 Ariz. 1979
Jackson v. Industrial Commission 592 P.2d 1258 Ariz. 1979
McKay v. Industrial Comm’n
State v. Lewis 589 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
Criticized State v. Lewis 589 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
Since we are bound by the decisions of our Supreme Court, , we are constrained to follow the rule.
Jackson v. Industrial Commission 592 P.2d 1270 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Jackson v. Industrial Commission 592 P.2d 1270 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
McKay v. Industrial Comm’n
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Citizens Utilities Co. 584 P.2d 1175 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Citizens Utilities Co. 584 P.2d 1175 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Flowers v. Flowers 578 P.2d 1006 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Graves v. White Mountain Apache Tribe of Fort Apache Indian Reservation 570 P.2d 803 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Graves v. White Mountain Apache Tribe of Fort Apache Indian Reservation 570 P.2d 803 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
in no uncertain terms let us know: “Whether prior decisions of the highest court in the state are to be disaffirmed is a question for the court which makes the decision.
Gates v. Industrial Commission 578 P.2d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Gates v. Industrial Commission 578 P.2d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Aside from our dissatisfaction with the results of All Star Coach and our inability to predict its consequences, were we merely in disagreement as to the legal principles to be applied in the sequence of successive injuries, , but by the traditional judicial hierarchy of appellate review to follow the holding in All Star Coach.
Sequoia Manufacturing Co. v. Halec Construction Co. 570 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Sequoia Manufacturing Co. v. Halec Construction Co. 570 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Had we the authority, , we might review the problems inherent in the doctrine prohibiting contribution between joint tortfeasors, see Court of Appeals opinion in Mustang Equipment, as well as the problems of a modern day jury, obviously aware of the existence of
Alsbrooks v. Industrial Commission 578 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Alsbrooks v. Industrial Commission 578 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Mustang Equipment, Inc. v. Welch 565 P.2d 882 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Mustang Equipment, Inc. v. Welch 565 P.2d 882 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
If we had the authority, ( , ), we might well engraft into the Arizona decisions a narrow exception regarding non-contribution of joint tortfeasors, see State Farm Mutual Insurance Company v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company, supra, along the lines set forth above regarding the informal activities of insurance carriers and so
Kriese v. Industrial Commission 554 P.2d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Kriese v. Industrial Commission 554 P.2d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
accomplished whenever it could be done without a special trip.” 1 Larson’s Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 18.13, p. 4-160 n. 7 (1972) In conclusion, we point out that the above-discussed principles first adopted in Butler, supra, are sound and have been reaffirmed and applied by the Arizona Supreme Court, not only in Hancock
State v. Williams 554 P.2d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
State v. Williams 554 P.2d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Peagler v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 547 P.2d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Peagler v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. 547 P.2d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
an argument could be made that this intermediate appellate court has no choice but to apply the pre-New York Times Arizona law to the facts here presented.
State v. Arizona Public Service Co. 540 P.2d 727 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
State v. Arizona Public Service Co. 540 P.2d 727 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
It is further our opinion that that case is controlling on the issues here and not having the power to overrule Supreme Court decisions, , we must follow its mandate, leaving to the Supreme Court the decision of whether it should reconsider its holding.
Batesole v. Batesole 535 P.2d 1314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Batesole v. Batesole 535 P.2d 1314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Stoddard v. Industrial Commission 532 P.2d 177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975