Legal Opinion · Dissent

Grammatico v. Industrial Commission

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 15, 2004No. 1 CA-IC 01-0117Published

1DissentBarker, Judge

I

¶ 26 My focus on this constitutional question differs from that of the majority. Specifically, the legislature could properly conclude that no act that is otherwise required in the work place is a “necessary risk or danger of such employment, or a necessary risk or danger inherent in the nature thereof,” Ariz. Const, art. 18, § 8 (emphasis added), when undertaken by a person whose actions are influenced by having intentionally and voluntarily consumed illegal drugs.

¶ 27 I appreciate that the act of being on stilts for this employee was a “necessary risk” of his employment. But being on…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Building & Construction Trades CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. United States v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Arizona Downs v. Arizona Horsemen's FoundationArizona Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Chevron Chemical Co. v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Goodyear Aircraft Corp. v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1945

9 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