processing claim in Arizona

7 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2009 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

Case	Followed	Cited
In Re Trullgreen arizctapp · 1974 · cited in 2 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1975–1977 2 sentences 1977As we noted in In Re Trull, supra: “The fact that a claimant must take some affirmative action after every notice of claim status during the processing of his claim means we have numerous time limitation pitfalls for the unwary claimant and his attorney.” 21 Ariz.App. at 514 , 520 P.2d at 1191 . 1975It is the announced general policy of law that cases should be tried on their merits and not disposed of on technicalities, (citations omitted) “These broad legal concepts have particular meaning in the field of Workmen’s Compensation where the statutes are re *470 medial in nature and are to be interpreted liberally to see that justice is done, (citations omitted) The fact that a claimant must take some affirmative action after every notice of claim status during the processing of his claim means we have numerous time limitation pitfalls for the unwary claimant and his attorney.” In Re Trull,	1	2

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

Case	Cited	Years
Taylor v. Industrial Commission green arizctapp · 1973 2 sentences 1974We are aware that a narrower interpretation of Parsons v. Bekins Freight, supra, was made by Department B of this Court in the cases of Taylor v. Industrial Commission, 20 Ariz.App. 46 , 509 P.2d 1083 (1973) and Garcia v. Industrial Commission, supra. We have been unable to find any Arizona Supreme Court decisions that would limit or prohibit the use of the Parsons v. Bekins Freight guidelines as applied to the facts of this case. 1974We are aware that a narrower interpretation of Parsons v. Bekins Freight, supra, was made by Department B of this Court in the cases of Taylor v. Industrial Commission, 20 Ariz.App. 46 , 509 P.2d 1083 (1973) and Garcia v. Industrial Commission, supra. We have been unable to find any Arizona Supreme Court decisions that would limit or prohibit the use of the Parsons v. Bekins Freight guidelines as applied to the facts of this case.	2	1974–1974
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Savio green colo · 1985 1 sentence 2009In so holding, we quoted with approval and relied on the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Travelers Insurance Co. v. Savio, 706 P.2d 1258 (Colo.1985): [A] compensation carrier’s intentional misconduct in the processing of a claim is neither a “direct” nor a “natural” consequence of an employment injury.	1	2009–2009
United Farm Workers National Union v. Heggblade - Marguleas - Tenneco, Inc. green arizctapp · 1974 1 sentence 1977As we noted in In Re Trull, supra: “The fact that a claimant must take some affirmative action after every notice of claim status during the processing of his claim means we have numerous time limitation pitfalls for the unwary claimant and his attorney.” 21 Ariz.App. at 514 , 520 P.2d at 1191 .	1	1977–1977
Talley v. Industrial Commission green ariz · 1969 2 sentences 1972The finality of the several stages of Industrial Commission adjudication is well established by Russell v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 104 Ariz. 548 , 456 P.2d 918 (1969), and Talley v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 105 Ariz. 162 , 461 P.2d 83 (1969). 1972The finality of the several stages of Industrial Commission adjudication is well established by Russell v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 104 Ariz. 548 , 456 P.2d 918 (1969), and Talley v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 105 Ariz. 162 , 461 P.2d 83 (1969).	1	1972–1972
Russell v. Industrial Commission green ariz · 1969 2 sentences 1972The finality of the several stages of Industrial Commission adjudication is well established by Russell v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 104 Ariz. 548 , 456 P.2d 918 (1969), and Talley v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 105 Ariz. 162 , 461 P.2d 83 (1969). 1972The finality of the several stages of Industrial Commission adjudication is well established by Russell v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 104 Ariz. 548 , 456 P.2d 918 (1969), and Talley v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 105 Ariz. 162 , 461 P.2d 83 (1969).	1	1972–1972
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Industrial Commission neutral ariz · 1964 2 sentences 1969Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Company v. Industrial Commission, 96 Ariz. 72 , 392 P.2d 28 . 1969Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Company v. Industrial Commission, 96 Ariz. 72 , 392 P.2d 28 .	1	1969–1969

Statutes the citing opinions construe

AZ § Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-1061 (4) AZ § Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-947 (4) AZ § Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-1047 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

OH 81 (1990–2025) NY 20 (1983–2020) AZ 7 (1969–2009) TX 4 (1991–2025) CO 4 (1974–2013) DE 3 (1995–1997) OR 3 (1982–2004) PA 2 (1981–2019) CA 2 (2007–2025) MA 2 (1996–2011) IL 2 (2004–2004) MD 2 (1954–1985) NJ 2 (1979–2002) MI 2 (2022–2022)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check