Legal Opinion

Harrelson v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 15, 1984No. 1 CA-IC 2735PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EUBANK, Judge.

In this special action petitioner-employee Phyllis Harrelson (petitioner) asks that the late filing of her worker’s compensation claim be excused. In considering her petition, we must decide whether the 1980 amendments to A.R.S. § 23-1061(A) may be applied retroactively to her industrial injury that occurred prior to the effective date of the amendments. We conclude that the amended statute was properly applied retroactively, and that petitioner was not “insane or legally incompetent or incapacitated” within the present meaning of that statute so as to excuse her untimely…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Chase Securities Corp. v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Chevron Chemical Co. v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Parsons v. Bekins FreightArizona Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Bedwell v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Bouldin v. TurekArizona Supreme Court · 1979

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Brown & Root Industrial Service v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1997
  3. U.S. Parking Systems v. City of PhoenixCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
  4. Collicott v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Safety & Compensation DivisionWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
  5. In Re CollicottWyoming Supreme Court · 2001

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API