Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Aranda v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona, 11 P.3d 1006.

74 citing documents.

David Garcia v. State of Arizona 146 P.3d 1007 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
David Garcia v. State of Arizona 146 P.3d 1007 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Kenneth T. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 128 P.3d 773 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Kenneth T. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 128 P.3d 773 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
Comm’n, ¶ 12, (“[Pjrocedural law relates to the manner and means by which a right to recover is enforced or provides no more than the method by which to proceed.”); , (procedural law describes the practice, method or proce
State v. Fell 115 P.3d 594 Ariz. 2005
State v. Fell 115 P.3d 594 Ariz. 2005
Naslund v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 110 P.3d 363 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Naslund v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZ. 110 P.3d 363 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. 105 P.3d 1163 Ariz. 2005
City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. 105 P.3d 1163 Ariz. 2005
Marriage of Cook v. Cook 104 P.3d 857 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Marriage of Cook v. Cook 104 P.3d 857 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Comm’n, , (workers’ compensation benefits); San Carlos, , Murray, , O’ , (amendment to statute proscribing jail term after act committed); Mejia v.
Anderson v. Industrial Commission 72 P.3d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Anderson v. Industrial Commission 72 P.3d 341 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
473 n. 3, ¶ 28, , 1012 n. 3 (2000).
State v. Griffin 58 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Griffin 58 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
[substantive] rights or obtaining redress.’” Aranda v. Industrial Comm’n, , quoting Hall v. A.N.R.
Mejia v. Industrial Commission 39 P.3d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Mejia v. Industrial Commission 39 P.3d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
and the record before us, we set aside the award.
Hanley v. Industrial Commission 21 P.3d 850 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Hanley v. Industrial Commission 21 P.3d 850 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
After the opening brief was filed, , which held that subsection 23-1031(A) is unconstitutionally retroactive if applied to an award of permanent disability compensation benefits that became final before December 1, 1997, provided that the criminal conduct also occurred before that date.
True v. Stewart 18 P.3d 707 Ariz. 2001
True v. Stewart 18 P.3d 707 Ariz. 2001
§ 1-244; see also Aranda v. Industrial Comm’n of Ariz.
Zuther v. State 14 P.3d 295 Ariz. 2000
Zuther v. State 14 P.3d 295 Ariz. 2000
¶ 18 , held that a prison inmate owned a vested property right in a workers’ compensation award that became final prior to the crime and the incarceration.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by