Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1/26/1982
Robarge v. Bechtel Power Corp.
Citations
- 640 P.2d 211
- 131 Ariz. 280
- 1982 Ariz. App. LEXIS 358
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- recognizing that legal conclusions to be drawn from undisputed facts are properly resolved by the court
- employee driving home at end of workday was not within the scope of employment because he was travelling in his own vehicle and without employer imposed obligations regarding route, manner of travel, or work-related duties.
- legal conclusions to be drawn from undisputed facts are properly resolved by court
- legal conclusions to be drawn from undisputed facts are properly resolved by court
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wren, Jacobson, McFate
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Aaron Engler v. Gulf Interstate Engineering IncArizona Supreme Court· 2012-07-09· cited 40×
- Jones v. BlairSupreme Court of Iowa· 1986-05-21· cited 33×
- Bruce v. Chas Roberts Air Conditioning, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1990-05-31· cited 23×
- James H. Hartzell, Beryl Hartzell, and Ross Hartzell v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1986-04-10· cited 22×
- Ortiz v. ClintonCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1996-11-12· cited 15×
- Brooks v. INDUS. COM'N OF ARIZONACourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1983-02-24· cited 8×
- State v. Pima County Adult Probation DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1985-10-31· cited 7×
- Zilisch v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1999-05-25· cited 2×
- BRYSTAL McCLOUD v. THOMAS MAX KIMBROCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2010-03-23
- France v. gila/arizona CountiesCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2020-02-18
- Eley v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day SaintsNinth Circuit· 2002-04-10
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Lundberg v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals· 1969-12-04· cited 136×
- Throop v. FE Young and CompanyArizona Supreme Court· 1963-06-05· cited 84×
- Luth v. Rogers and Babler Construction CompanyAlaska Supreme Court· 1973-03-19· cited 68×
- Beard v. BrownWyoming Supreme Court· 1980-08-15· cited 66×
- Scottsdale Jaycees v. SUPERIOR CT. OF MARICOPA CO.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-07-27· cited 37×
- Serrano v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court· 1953-05-11· cited 36×
- Consolidated Motors, Inc. v. KetchamArizona Supreme Court· 1937-03-29· cited 32×
- Perez v. TomberlinArizona Supreme Court· 1959-06-17· cited 26×
- Anderson v. GobeaCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-10-17· cited 24×
- Lundy v. Prescott Valley, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court· 1974-02-20· cited 22×
- State v. Superior Court, in & for County of MaricopaArizona Supreme Court· 1974-07-17· cited 22×
- Fisher Contracting Co. v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1976-08-10· cited 17×
- Gibson v. W.D. Parker TrustCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1974-10-21· cited 15×
- Driscoll v. HarmonArizona Supreme Court· 1979-10-15· cited 15×
- Faul v. Jelco, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1979-04-09· cited 12×
- Burns v. WheelerArizona Supreme Court· 1968-11-06· cited 11×
- Ohio Farmers Insurance v. NormanCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1979-03-09· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.