Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Horn v. Industrial Commission

Supreme Court of Arizona

May 2, 1949

HORN et al.
v.
INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al

Appeal by Certiorari from Award of Industrial Commission.

Workmen's compensation proceeding for injuries by Velma Ruess, employee, opposed by Sarah Horn and Marion Horn, doing business as Horn's. To review an award by the Industrial Commission of Arizona on behalf of employee, the employers bring certiorari.

Award affirmed.

Edward Aboud, of Tucson, for petitioners.

Robert E. Yount, of Phoenix (H. S. McCluskey, of Phoenix, and Donald J. Morgan, of Prescott, of counsel), for respondent Industrial Commission.

Stanford, Justice. Udall, Phelps, and De Concini, JJ., and Charles C. Bernstein, Superior Judge, concur. Note: Chief Justice La PRADE did not participate. The Honorable CHARLES C. BERNSTEIN, Judge of the Superior Court of Maricopa County, was called to sit in his stead.

OPINION

Stanford, Justice.

This case comes to us by certiorari to review an award by The Industrial Commission of Arizona on behalf of respondent Velma Ruess.

The petitioners, Sarah and Marion Horn, doing business as Horn's, operated a ladies' clothing store in Tucson, Arizona, where respondent Ruess was employed and they were not covered by workmen's compensation insurance.

On March 12, 1948, respondent claims that: "I was carrying clothes with both hands. I slipped on a sequin which had fallen on the floor. My knee struck a full box of wire hangers and I fell forward striking the top of my head against the wall, forcing my head down into my shoulders."

On May 24, 1948, respondent filed with the commission her claim for workmen's compensation for this injury caused by accident [68 Ariz. 324] arising out of and in the course of her employment by petitioners. The respondent was attended by a physician on April 19, 1948, and the report of the physician was filed with the commission May 18, 1948, all of which happened before the filing of a claim for compensation by respondent. Employer's first report of the injury was filed with the commission on May 28, 1948. A second report was filed June 10, 1948, which contained the statement (referring to respondent) that "She slipped and fell." An investigator for the commission called on petitioners and caused the above reports to be sent to the commission.

June 21, 1948, the commission entered its findings and award for temporary disability, and on June 24th the petitioners applied for a rehearing, which petition set forth the following grounds:

"In view of the fact that both doctors stated to me that this lady's present condition is not due to her accident on March 12, 1948 and she stated same. She has been sick ever since we hired her and has taken quite a bit of time off. She has taken time off at the store to lie down."

The award was for "The sum of $ 4.23 per day from and after April 29, 1948 to continue during said applicant's disability, payable every fourteen days, or until further order of this Commission." There was also an award for the cost of medical, surgical, hospital and accident benefits necessary to cure ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.