Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Chambers
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1DissentJohn E. Jennings, Judge
Certainly the result reached by the majority in this case is an equitable one, but the question is one of law not equity. The question is what does this statute mean. Does a specially equipped van qualify as an “other apparatus” within the meaning of the statute?
In interpreting a statute, we try to ascertain the intention of the legislature. Jackson v. Blytheville Civ. Serv. Comm’n, 345 Ark. 56, 43 S.W.3d 748 (2001). It was formerly the rule in this state, as it apparendy still is in all other states, that workers’ compensation statutes, being remedial legislation, should be liberally…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hanley v. Arkansas State Claims CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- R & T Construction Co. v. JudgeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
- Terry Grantham Co. v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- Jackson v. City of Blytheville Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
- Manpower Temporary Services v. SiosonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.