Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Superior & Pittsburg Copper Co. v. Tomich, 165 P. 1101.

24 citing documents.

State v. Greer 948 P.2d 995 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Greer 948 P.2d 995 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Superior & -89 , 165 P. 1101, 1104 (1917), aff'd, 250 U.S. 400 , 39 S.Ct.
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. 861 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. 861 P.2d 668 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
Freight System, Inc., supra; Superior & , 165 P. 1101 (1917).
City of Tucson v. Fahringer 781 P.2d 637 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
City of Tucson v. Fahringer 781 P.2d 637 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
It prescribes the procedure that must be followed if contributory negligence is asserted as a defense, but it “does not restrict the power of the legislature to modify or abolish the defense of contributory negligence.” Id., quoting Superior & , 165 P. 1101, 1109 (1917) (emphasis added in Hall).
Hall v. A.N.R. Freight System, Inc. 717 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1986
Hall v. A.N.R. Freight System, Inc. 717 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1986
In Superior & , 165 P. 1101 (1917), we responded that art. 18, § 5 “does not restrict the power of the legislature to modify or abolish the defense of contributory negligence.” 19 Ariz. at 186 , 165 P. at 1109 .
Hilltop Metals Mining Co. v. Hall 241 P. 35 Ariz. 1925
Hilltop Metals Mining Co. v. Hall 241 P. 35 Ariz. 1925
462 ; Superior & , 165 Pac.
E. A. Tovrea & Co. v. Yutich 206 P. 595 Ariz. 1922
Southwest Cotton Co. v. Ryan 199 P. 124 Ariz. 1921
Southwest Cotton Co. v. Ryan 199 P. 124 Ariz. 1921
y evidence that he was employed by the defendant in an occupation declared hazardous, and while engaged in the performance of the duties required of him was injured, and the injury was caused by an accident due to a condition or conditions of such employment, and was not caused by the negligence of plaintiff.” Practically the same language is used in Superior & , 165 *533 Pac.
Young Mines Co. v. Blackburn 196 P. 167 Ariz. 1921
Young Mines Co. v. Blackburn 196 P. 167 Ariz. 1921
The instructions are directly in line with the holding of this court in the case of Superior & , 165 Pac.
Consolidated Arizona Smelting Co. v. Egich 199 P. 132 Ariz. 1920
Consolidated Arizona Smelting Co. v. Egich 199 P. 132 Ariz. 1920
e risks and hazards inherent in such occupations without regard to the negligence of the employer, as such negligence is understood in tlie common law of liability; in other words, such statute creates a liability for accidents arising from the risks and hazards inherent in the occupation without regard to the negligence or fault of the employer.” In Superior & , 165 Pac.
United Verde Copper Co. v. Wiley 183 P. 737 Ariz. 1919
Swansea Lease, Inc. v. Molloy 183 P. 740 Ariz. 1919
Swansea Lease, Inc. v. Molloy 183 P. 740 Ariz. 1919
278, 1183 , Superior & , 165 Pac.
United Verde Copper Co. v. Wiley 183 P. 737 Ariz. 1919
281 , 1183; Superior & , 165 Pac.
Calumet & Arizona Mining Co. v. Chambers 176 P. 839 Ariz. 1918
Calumet & Arizona Mining Co. v. Chambers 176 P. 839 Ariz. 1918
278 , and in Superior & , 165 Pac.
Superior & Pittsburg Copper Co. v. Davidovitch 171 P. 127 Ariz. 1918