Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Arizona: Liberal Construction of Comp Statutes Allows Court to Ignore Pain Requirement in Hernia Case

October 10, 2014 (1 min read)

An Arizona appellate court affirmed a decision of the state’s Industrial Commission awarding benefits for a hernia that was unaccompanied by pain in spite of a clear statutory requirement that the immediate cause of the hernia must be a severe strain or blow “accompanied by severe pain” [see A.R.S. § 23–1043(2)]. Quoting Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the court indicated the real issue was one of work-connectedness. Was the relationship between the industrial incident and the hernia real? Answering the question affirmatively, the court, again quoting Larson, said that it was “well settled that the workers’ compensation statutes are designed to benefit the injured employee rather than the employer.”

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to

See City of Tucson v. Pinnacle Risk Management, 2014 Ariz. App. LEXIS 195 (Sept. 30, 2014)  [2014 Ariz. App. LEXIS 195 (Sept. 30, 2014)]

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 43.02 [43.02]

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site



Special Discount Rate of $79.50 + tax & shipping for a limited time only

New! Workers' Compensation Emerging Issues Analysis, 2014 Edition (400 pp). Read flyer & Order today. Books expected to ship 10/24/2014.

State by State Workers' Comp Legislation for 2014. Expert analysis and commentary. Larson Spotlight on Interesting Cases.

This year's top issue: The Temporary Workforce and Impact on Workers' Compensation