Irvin Investors, Inc. v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• directing employee's negligent hiring, retention, and supervision claim to 17 be dismissed because it was covered by the workers' compensation statute
• directing entry of summary 9 judgment in the employer’s favor regarding the employee’s negligent hiring, retention, and 10 supervision claim because the claim was covered by Arizona’s workers’ compensation 11 statute
• Arizona's worker's compensation exclusivity clause applied since the employee could have recovered workers' compensation benefits for an injury suffered after she was sexually molested by a coworker
• Arizona’s worker’s compensation exclusivity clause applied since the employee could have recovered workers’ compensation benefits for an injury suffered after she was sexually molested by a coworker
• Arizona’s worker’s compensation exclusivity clause applied since the employee could have recovered workers’ compensation benefits for an injury suffered after she was sexually molested by a coworker

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).