Madison Granite Co. v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZ.
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MEYERSON, Presiding Judge.
The primary issue in this special action is whether the administrative law judge (AU) correctly concluded that there was a conflict in the medical evidence and resolved the conflict by accepting the testimony of William R. Kozub, PhD, even though Kozub was not a medical doctor. For the reasons explained below, we conclude that a witness in a proceeding before the Industrial Commission (Commission) may offer medical testimony even though not a medical doctor so long as he or she possesses the necessary qualifications to be deemed an “expert” on the subject of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Vincent E. Jenkins v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1962
- Gaston v. HunterCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
- State v. GrahamArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Fitzmaurice v. FlynnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Redmond v. BaxleyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. EldredgeUtah Supreme Court · 1989
- Baroldy v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1988
- O'Loughlin v. Circle a ConstructionIdaho Supreme Court · 1987
- and 15CA0203. DA Mountain Rentals, LLC v. The Lodge at Lionshead Phase III Condominium Association, IncColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
- Wal-Mart v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.