Le Duc v. Industrial Commission
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JACOBSON, Presiding Judge.
On this review the petitioner questions the sufficiency of the evidence to support the Commission’s finding which limited her loss of earning capacity to 39.26%. Precisely, is there any reasonable evidence that the petitioner can be employed as a restaurant hostess/cashier?
Petitioner, Aurora Le Due, while employed as a check-out cashier at the El Rancho Market, suffered a sprained back on March 7, 1974. Petitioner’s claim was accepted for workmen’s compensation benefits by the respondent carrier, Great American Insurance Co., and temporary compensation and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Germany v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973
- Dye v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
- Massie v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1976
- Sandoval v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
3Cited by18 opinions
- Roach v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Boy v. Fremont Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- Roach v. Industrial Com'n of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Tucson Steel Division v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- Arizona Dept. of Public Safety v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.