Frito-Lay v. Utah Labor Commission
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DURRANT, Associate Chief Justice:
INTRODUCTION
{1 This appeal arises from Amy Claus-ing's claim against Frito-Lay and its insurance carrier, Transcontinental Insurance Co. (collectively, "Frito-Lay"), for temporary disability compensation under the Utah Workers' Compensation Act. It raises three issues that we must resolve: (1) whether the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, and specifically rule 60, are applicable to administrative proceedings; (2) whether the Utah Labor Commission has statutory authority similar to the authority a district court would have under rule 60 to modify a former order;…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Bailey v. BaylesUtah Supreme Court · 2002
- Myers v. McDonaldUtah Supreme Court · 1981
- Menzies v. GaletkaUtah Supreme Court · 2006
- Brown & Root Industrial Service v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1997
- Nebeker v. Utah State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Leo P. Pratt, III v. Andrew Pallito, Commissioner, Department of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Vermont · 2017
- Rawlings v. RawlingsUtah Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. RuizUtah Supreme Court · 2012
- Zions Management Services v. RecordUtah Supreme Court · 2013
- Employers' Reinsurance Fund v. Labor CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 2012
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.