Jacobsen v. Industrial Commission, 6
| Decision Date | 18 December 1969 |
| Docket Number | R,No. 6,CA-IC,No. 1,6,1 |
| Citation | 462 P.2d 402,11 Ariz.App. 105 |
| Parties | Juana G. JACOBSEN, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Respondent, Washington School Districtespondent Employer, State Compensation Fund, Respondent Carrier. 219. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Gorey & Ely, by Joseph M. Bettini, Phoenix, for petitioner.
Donald L. Cross, Chief Counsel, Phoenix, for The Industrial Commission of Arizona.
Robert K. Park, Chief Counsel, by Courtney L. Varner, Phoenix, for State Compensation Fund.
The issue to be determined is whether an erroneous determination of the petitioner's average monthly wage had become res judicata.
The petitioner, at the time of her injury on 4 February 1966, was a teacher with a 9-month contract which called for a gross salary of $7,302.00 for the school year. This sum, divided by 12, results in the figure of $608.50. The same sum divided by 9 results in the figure of $811.33. The Arizona Supreme Court in Powell v. Industrial Commission, 104 Ariz. 257, 451 P.2d 37 (1969), decided the proper method for determining the average monthly wage under similar circumstances, stating:
'We, therefore, hold that the average monthly wage under petitioner's employment was covered by the contract under which she was employed and that her average monthly wage should be fixed by dividing the amount of the contract by the period of employment, which was approximately nine months. 'The decision of the Court of Appeals, holding that the average monthly wage should be fixed on the basis of the contract, is affirmed and the award of the Industrial Commission is set aside.'
Since the Industrial Commission determined that the petitioner's average monthly wage in the claim now before this Court was the sum of $608.50, it would appear that the award should be set aside.
However, awards fixed her average monthly wage at $608.50. On 23 March 1967 the Industrial Commission entered its 'Findings and Award for Continuing Benefits and Establishing Average Monthly Wage.' One of the findings is as follows:
One paragraph of the award is as follows:
This award was properly served upon the petitioner. It contained a 20-day clause. No action was taken by the petitioner in relation to the award.
On 18 October 1967, the Industrial Commission entered its 'Findings and Award for Scheduled Permanent Disability,' and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
ASARCO INC. v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA, 1 CA-IC 01-0108.
...setting aside a final award. See Page v. Indus. Comm'n, 12 Ariz.App. 250, 251, 469 P.2d 484, 485 (1970); Jacobsen v. Indus. Comm'n, 11 Ariz.App. 105, 106, 462 P.2d 402, 403 (1969). We therefore do not set aside the award set forth in the November notice on the basis of clerical II. Res Judi......
-
Industrial Indem. Co. v. Industrial Commission
...303, 492 P.2d 1241 (1972).3 See Steward v. Industrial Commission, 69 Ariz. 159, 211 P.2d 217 (1949); Jacobsen v. Industrial Commission, 11 Ariz.App. 105, 462 P.2d 402 (1969); and Page v. Industrial Commission, 12 Ariz.App. 250, 469 P.2d 484 (1970). But see; International Metal Products Divi......
-
Pinkerton v. Industrial Commission
...162, 461 P.2d 83; Pedigo v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (1969), 104 Ariz. 433, 454 P.2d 975; Jacobsen v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (1969), 11 Ariz.App. 105, 462 P.2d (402) 403; Page v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (1970), 12 Ariz.App. 250, 469 P.2d 484, filed May 25, The Com......
-
State Compensation Fund v. McComb and Industrial Commission
...differentiated from decisions such as Steward v. Industrial Commission, 69 Ariz. 159, 211 P.2d 217 (1949); Jacobsen v. Industrial Commission, 11 Ariz.App. 105, 462 P.2d 402 (1969); and Page v. Industrial Commission, 12 Ariz.App. 250, 469 P.2d 484 (1970), which hold that a mistake of law res......