Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Industrial Commission

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided March 10, 1967No. 1 CA-IC 112PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEVENS, Judge.

The issues concern the factual determination that the petitioner was a domestic in-servant and excluded from coverage by the policy held by the respondent employer.

A. A. Fearn and J. A. Fearn are father and son. For convenience, they will be referred to as Fearn, Sr. and Fearn, Jr. respectively. Prior to the retirement of Fearn, Sr., he and his son were partners in a small family enterprise raising cattle and cotton. They elected to be insured with The Industrial Commission of Arizona as authorized by A.R.S. Section 23-902. The policy contained the following heading designating…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Nickerson v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Griebel v. Industrial Com'n of ArizonaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
  2. Sullivan v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1968
  3. Torres v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API