Obregon v. Industrial Commission of Arizona

How courts have described this case

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

• reviewing a suspended benefits claim due to employee’s criminal conviction for fraudulently seeking to obtain compensation benefits pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-1028
• court should interpret statute to give meaning to each word, not making any word superfluous or duplicative
• “It is a ‘normal rule of statutory construction that identical words used in different parts of the same Act are intended to have the same meaning.’ ”
• “It is a ‘normal rule of statutory construction’ that ‘identical words used in different parts of the same Act are intended to have the same meaning.’” (quoting Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc., 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).