Legal Opinion

Hamer v. Industrial Commission

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided April 9, 1934No. Civil No. 3410PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoss, C. J.

The petitioners Walter Hamer, Sr., and Mary S. Hamer, father and mother of Walter Hamer, Jr., who while employed by the Six Companies, Inc., was accidentally killed, applied to the Industrial Commission for death benefits as dependents of the deceased. The commission on March 14, 1933, found that Walter, Jr., was killed in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment; that his average monthly wage was $168; that he left surviving him and totally dependent upon him for support at the time of his injury the petitioners; and awarded the petitioners benefits of $42 a month…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Zagar v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Federal Mutual Liability Insurance v. Industrial Commission of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Federal Mutual Liability Insurance v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Cortez v. Arizona Wool Growers' Assn.Arizona Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Steward v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Madrigal v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Martin v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Hamlin v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Taylor v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973

12 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