Blickenstaff v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JACOBSON, Presiding Judge.
This special action presents two issues. First, did the petitioner sustain his burden of proving a meritorious reason for the untimely filing of a Request for Hearing. Second, does a Petition to Reopen accompanied by a physician’s year-old statement of condition which is both illegible and nonspecific sufficiently comply with A.R.S. § 23-1061(H).
By way of introduction, a brief review of the facts is essential. Petitioner Harold Blickenstaff sustained an abrasion and low back strain on October 4, 1973 in an industrial injury while in the employ of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Parsons v. Bekins FreightArizona Supreme Court · 1972
- Chavez v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1974
- Janis v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1974
- Kleinsmith v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Kleinsmith v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Post v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONAArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- Matter of Estate of KerrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
- Scroggins v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
- Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
- Valley National Bank v. DykstraCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.