Boone v. Industrial Commission
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
EUBANK, Presiding Judge.
The only question presented for our review by writ of certiorari is whether the petitioner succeeded in proving that her deceased husband was within one of the accepted exceptions to “going and coming rule” at the time of his death thereby entitling her to death benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. 1
The “going and coming rule” is described in Butler v. Industrial Commission, 50 Ariz. 516, 521, 73 P.2d 703, 705 (1937) in this manner:
“It is of course the general rule in compensation cases, subject to a few exceptions, that a man does not enter an employment…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Claim of Dependents of Marks v. GrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Butler v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1937
- McCampbell v. Benevolent & Protective Order of ElksArizona Supreme Court · 1950
- Serrano v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1953
- Hancock v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lang v. Department of Labor & IndustriesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1983
- Martin v. Cumberland County Commissioners' Manpower DepartmentSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Martin v. CUMBERLAND CTY. COM'RS, ETC.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979