Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Benites v. Industrial Commission, 467 P.2d 911.

30 citing documents.

Western Water Works v. Industrial Commission 144 P.3d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Western Water Works v. Industrial Commission 144 P.3d 535 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
¶ 7 In Meva, the Arizona Supreme Court held that: Any formal written document in a matter adjudicating the right of a , whether entitled a “Commission action,” an “Order” or an “award,” and which contains a direct determination of some issue in relation to the claim of a particular injured workman is an award.
Carranza v. Industrial Commission 529 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
Carranza v. Industrial Commission 529 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
459 , vacated , Land v. Industrial Commission, 15 Ariz.App.
Benson v. Industrial Commission 505 P.2d 1387 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Benson v. Industrial Commission 505 P.2d 1387 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
the Verdugo Supreme-Court decision having vacated the Verdugoopinions of the Court of Appeals, supra,, which were relied on in the 26
Land v. Industrial Commission 496 P.2d 139 Ariz. 1972
Land v. Industrial Commission 496 P.2d 139 Ariz. 1972
Verdugo v. Industrial Commission 492 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1972
Verdugo v. Industrial Commission 492 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1972
It is the decision, not the signing, which is required.” Benites, supra, at 519, 520 , 467 P:2d 911 at 913, 914 (1970).
Jenners v. Industrial Commission 491 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Jenners v. Industrial Commission 491 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Land v. Industrial Commission 486 P.2d 229 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Land v. Industrial Commission 486 P.2d 229 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
filed 13 April 1970, indicated should be done.
Verdugo v. Industrial Commission 487 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Verdugo v. Industrial Commission 487 P.2d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
This opinion was subsequently vacated by the Supreme Court ( , ), which reached the same result — setting aside of the Commission award.
Johnson v. Industrial Commission 487 P.2d 759 Ariz. 1971
Johnson v. Industrial Commission 487 P.2d 759 Ariz. 1971
cited by petitioner in his brief is not applicable to this case.
Meva Corporation v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 844 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Meva Corporation v. Industrial Commission 485 P.2d 844 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
69), , made it clear that there is no magic in the word “award.” Any formal written document in a matter adjudicating the right of a , whether entitled a. “Commission action,” an “order,” or an “award,” and which contains a direct determination of some issue in relation to the claim of a particular injured workman is an award.
Chapman v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Chapman v. Industrial Commission 484 P.2d 206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Cauley v. Industrial Commission, 13 Ariz.App.
Tanner Bros. Contracting Co. v. Industrial Commission 483 P.2d 50 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Tanner Bros. Contracting Co. v. Industrial Commission 483 P.2d 50 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
this does not constitute a valid award, and therefore does not become res judicata.
Cauley v. Industrial Commission 475 P.2d 761 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
Cauley v. Industrial Commission 475 P.2d 761 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
B, 1964.” This Court after hearing the matter and going through the file noticed the rubber-stamped awards,, it being cognizant of the stá , concerning the validity of an award.
Burnkrant v. Saggau 470 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Burnkrant v. Saggau 470 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Land v. Industrial Commission 469 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Land v. Industrial Commission 469 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
filed 13 April 1970, indicated should be done.