Klosterman v. Industrial Commission of Arizona

747 P.2d 596, 155 Ariz. 435 (1987)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Klosterman v. Industrial Commission of Arizona

Arizona Court of Appeals
747 P.2d 596, 155 Ariz. 435 (1987)

Facts

Frederick J. Klosterman (plaintiff) suffered an injury to his left knee at work, and his injury was covered by workers’ compensation. Klosterman was treated by Eugene J. Chandler, M.D., for his injury, which required surgery. A few months later, Klosterman was playing frisbee when he jumped on his right leg and experienced a little collision, tearing a ligament in his left knee. Klosterman was again treated by Dr. Chandler, and Klosterman sought workers’-compensation benefits for his second knee injury. The workers’-compensation insurance carrier, Argonaut (defendant), denied coverage. Klosterman appealed. At the hearings before the Industrial Commission of Arizona, Dr. Chandler testified that playing frisbee did cause the second knee injury, but that Klosterman’s earlier knee injury and surgeries had weakened his knee, and Klosterman would not have torn his ligament playing frisbee if not for the earlier injury. Dr. Chandler’s testimony was uncontroverted. No one raised the issue of whether Klosterman’s actions in playing frisbee were unreasonable. The administrative-law judge found that Klosterman’s second injury was a new, noncompensable injury and did not address the reasonableness of Klosterman’s actions in playing frisbee. Klosterman sought administrative review, arguing that the administrative-law judge had ignored Dr. Chandler’s testimony. The decision was affirmed, and Klosterman appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Grant, J.)

Concurrence (Contreas, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership