Legal Opinion

Ewing v. Holton

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 2001No. 26113Published

1Opinion of the Court

KIDWELL, Justice.

This appeal arises from a decision by the Industrial Commission, denying Claimant Ewing’s worker’s compensation claim because she failed to meet the time requirements set forth in Idaho Code section 72-706(1). We affirm.

I

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The following statement of facts is a summary of the stipulation of facts entered into by the parties.

Claimant Darlene Ewing worked for John H. Holton, D.M.D., as a dental hygienist from July of 1990 until October 24,1997. On October 27, 1997, Ewing sought treatment for “upper extremity complaints.” She was seen by nurse…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ogden v. ThompsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Boise Orthopedic Clinic v. Idaho State Insurance FundIdaho Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Bainbridge v. Boise Cascade Plywood MillIdaho Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Boyd v. Potlatch Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API