Wammack v. Peerless Concrete Pipe Co.

Arizona Supreme Court

Wammack v. Peerless Concrete Pipe Co.

357 P.2d 617, 89 Ariz. 32, 1960 Ariz. LEXIS 181

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 14, 1960

DocketNo. 6939

StatusPublished

This text of 357 P.2d 617 (Wammack v. Peerless Concrete Pipe Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wammack v. Peerless Concrete Pipe Co., 357 P.2d 617, 89 Ariz. 32, 1960 Ariz. LEXIS 181 (Ark. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

UDALL, Justice.

This case is in all essential details identical with Scott v. Wasielewski, 88 Ariz. -, 357 P.2d 614. Both we and counsel have treated them as companion cases. Petitioner in this case was injured and after a hearing and some litigation was placed in the status of temporary partial disability with a finding that his condition was stationary. Before entering a final order as to petitioner’s loss of earning capacity, the Commission conducted a thorough investigation employing private investigators. After an appropriate hearing the Commission concluded that the claims of petitioner were fraudulent and entered a final order denying him further compensation.

Although the parties involved are different, it was stipulated that the facts are in all material respects identical. For the reasons given in Scott v. Wasielewski, supra, the award of the Commission is affirmed,

STRUCKMEYER, C. J., and PHELPS and BERNSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UDALL, Justice.

This case is in all essential details identical with Scott v. Wasielewski, 88 Ariz. -, 357 P.2d 614. Both we and counsel have treated them as companion cases. Petitioner in this case was injured and after a hearing and some litigation was placed in the status of temporary partial disability with a finding that his condition was stationary. Before entering a final order as to petitioner’s loss of earning capacity, the Commission conducted a thorough investigation employing private investigators. After an appropriate hearing the Commission concluded that the claims of petitioner were fraudulent and entered a final order denying him further compensation.

Although the parties involved are different, it was stipulated that the facts are in all material respects identical. For the reasons given in Scott v. Wasielewski, supra, the award of the Commission is affirmed,

STRUCKMEYER, C. J., and PHELPS and BERNSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

357 P.2d 617, 89 Ariz. 32, 1960 Ariz. LEXIS 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wammack-v-peerless-concrete-pipe-co-ariz-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack