Naglieri v. Industrial Commission
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1DissentThumma, Judge
¶ 32 The Majority correctly states the administrative law judge (ALJ) had the discretion to grant Claimant Michael Naglieri’s request for an additional evidentiary hearing. Given the record and the deferential standard of review, however, I do not agree with the Majority’s conclusion that the ALJ lacked the discretion to deny Naglieri’s request for an additional evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, because the ALJ did not abuse her discretion, I would affirm, and because I would affirm, I respectfully dissent.
¶ 33 Mark Meyer’s affidavit, with the exception of a single sentence discussed below,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Comerica Bank v. MAHMOODICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
- Keovorabouth v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Southwest Nurseries v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
- Mother Tucker's Food Experience & Insurance v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- Marcus v. FoxCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.