Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 23
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-681 (2026)

Changing hearing date; good cause

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The scheduled hearing date may be advanced or postponed if the parties agree or on a showing of good cause.

B. Good cause exists if the request is reasonable or the circumstance causing the request is beyond the control of the requesting party and failure to grant the postponement would cause undue hardship to the requesting party.

C. The department of economic security shall adopt rules:

1. To set standards under which a party may be excused for failure to attend a hearing for good cause.

2. To allow a party who failed to attend a hearing to file a written or electronic request to reopen the hearing.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1959–1974 · leading case: Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Doughty, 478 P.2d 109 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Doughty, 478 P.2d 109 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 8× “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-681, and on 6 July 1966, the claimant filed a petition for review from the decision of the Commission in the Superior Court for Maricopa County.”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Myers, 495 P.2d 857 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 6× “Myers, instituted the action in the court below by timely filing a petition for judicial review of the final decision of the Employment Security Commission, pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-681. His petition alleged that the decision of the Commission affirming the decision of the Appeal…”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Kosic, 471 P.2d 757 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 6× “We agree with the appellant that under A.R.S. § 23-681, subsecs. B & C, the court erred in accepting said testimony.”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of North Am., 523 P.2d 105 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “” The Commission contends the Superior Court review of the Commission decision under A.R.S. § 23-681 is not a trial de novo and that the above-quoted finding of fact, if supported by competent evidence, cannot be overturned by the Superior Court.”
Cramer v. Emp. Sec. Com'n of Arizona, 367 P.2d 956 (Ariz. 1962). · cites it 2× “In order that appeal to the Superior Court from a denial of benefits may be more than an empty right, however, it is required that such a finding be supported by “competent, material and substantial evidence in view of the entire record * * * ” A.R.S. § 23-681, subd. D, par. 5.…”
Vickers v. W. Elec. Co., 339 P.2d 1033 (Ariz. 1959). · cites it 2× “Within the time allowed by law, and in pursuance of A.R.S. § 23-681, appellee petitioned the Superior Court of Maricopa County for a review.”
Miranda v. Beaman, 391 P.2d 555 (Ariz. 1964). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 23-681, subd. D provides : “The court may affirm the decision of the commission or remand the case for further proceedings, or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantial rights of the petitioners have been prejudiced because the administrative findings,…”
Richert v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 510 P.2d 410 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 12× “” Appellant pursued all available administrative remedies without success and then sought judicial review pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-681, as amended. The lower court affirmed the Commission’s decision and this appeal followed.”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Valley Nat'l Bank, 513 P.2d 1343 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 23-681, subsec. C. The Bank contends that illness is a “compelling personal reason, not attributable to the employer” which would justify its discharging this employee without having unemployment benefits paid to that employee charged to its experience rating.”
Harwood v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 490 P.2d 1192 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 4× “We quote A.R.S. § 23-681, in part, as follows: “§ 23-681.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.