Young v. Environmental Air Products, Inc.
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
FELDMAN, Justice.
Plaintiffs Mason and Young claim they were injured while working for Cimetta Construction Company (Cimetta), a contractor engaged in erection of a new building for Environmental Air Products (EAP). Plaintiffs brought a tort action against EAP and others. In defense, EAP argued that it was plaintiffs’ employer by operation of law (a “statutory employer” 1 under A.R.S. § 23-902(B)), and was, therefore, entitled to the benefit of A.R.S. §§ 23-906 and 23-1022, which provide that absent rejection of compensation coverage before injury, workmen’s compensation is an injured…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Novenson v. Spokane Culvert & Fabricating Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1979
- Laffoon v. Bell & Zoller Coal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1976
- Word v. Motorola, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Basurto v. Utah Construction & Mining CompanyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Stover v. Lakeland Square Owners Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1989
- Word v. Motorola, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Anton v. Industrial Commission of ArizonaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- Bennett v. Industrial Com'n of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1986
- Pinter Construction Co. v. FrisbyUtah Supreme Court · 1984
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.