Legal Opinion

Aguilar v. State

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 2019No. Docket No. 45581PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEGNER, Justice.

Arturo Aguilar (Aguilar) appeals from the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of the Idaho Industrial Commission in which it concluded the Idaho Industrial Special Indemnity Fund (ISIF) was not liable to him for worker's compensation benefits. The *1245Industrial Commission (the Commission) found that Aguilar was totally and permanently disabled and that he had pre-existing impairments that constituted subjective hindrances to his employment. However, the Commission rejected Aguilar's claim that the ISIF was liable for benefits. We vacate and remand.

I. FACTUAL AND…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Kinney v. Tupperware Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Zapata v. J.R. Simplot Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Sines v. AppelIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Bybee v. State, Indus. Special Indem.Idaho Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Boley v. State, Industrial Special Indemnity FundIdaho Supreme Court · 1997

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ayala v. Robert J. Meyers Farms, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Nelson v. State of Idaho, Industrial Special Indemnity FundIdaho Supreme Court · 2024
  3. Lowery v. KuykendallIdaho Supreme Court · 2024
  4. Smith v. Industrial Special Indemnity FundIdaho Supreme Court · 2019
  5. State v. Enriquez-MezaCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2019

2 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