Buy This Entire Record For
LLC v. Industrial Commission of Arizona
Court of Appeals of Arizona, First Division
December 26, 2013
M3 TRANSPORT, LLC, Petitioner Employer,
THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ARIZONA, Respondent, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/RTW, Petitioner Carrier, WYLIE HARRISON, JR., Respondent Employee. M3 TRANSPORT, LLC, Petitioner Employer, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY/RTW, Petitioner Carrier,
THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ARIZONA, Respondent, KENNETH INGRAM, Respondent Employee.
Not for Publication – Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Special Action - Industrial Commission ICA Claim Nos. 20112-660088 / 20112-690220 Carrier Claim Nos. 365443 / 365436 The Honorable Allen B. Shayo, Administrative Law Judge.
Richards Law Office, P.C, Phoenix By Charles F. Richards Counsel for Petitioner Employer and Petitioner Carrier.
The Industrial Commission of Arizona, Phoenix By Andrew F. Wade Counsel for Respondent.
Jerome, Gibson, Stewart, Stevenson, Engle & Runbeck, P.C, Phoenix By Darryl Engle Counsel for Respondent Employee Harrison.
Robert J. Hommel, P.C, Scottsdale By Robert J. Hommel, George V. Sarkisov Counsel for Respondent Employee Ingram.
Presiding Judge Peter B. Swann delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Patricia K. Norris and Judge Donn Kessler joined.
¶1 This is a consolidated special action review of Industrial Commission of Arizona ("ICA") decisions and awards for compensable claims. Appellants raise six issues on appeal:
(1) Whether the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") abused his discretion by finding that petitioner employer, M3 Transport, LLC, was paying for respondent employee Kenneth Ingram's motel room at the time of the accident;
(2) Whether the ALJ abused his discretion by finding that the claimants were on duty because they were receiving either breakdown pay or hotel room reimbursement or both;
(3) Whether the ALJ abused his discretion by finding that the employer benefitted from the claimants' trip to the M3 Transport terminal to check on the status of repairs to their truck;
(4) Whether the ALJ's determination that the employer benefitted from the claimants making themselves "available for dispatch" is ...