Slover Masonry, Inc. v. Industrial Commission
Arizona Supreme Court
761 P.2d 1035 (1988)
Thaddeus Williamson (plaintiff) sustained a work-related knee injury during his employment as a hod carrier with Slover Masonry, Inc. (Slover) (defendant). Williamson underwent five surgeries, but he continued to experience pain, neurological issues, and restricted motion in his right leg and foot. The state industrial commission (plaintiff) issued a notice of permanent disability benefits stating that Williamson had a 50 percent loss of function in his right leg. Williamson requested a hearing to prove that his percentage of permanent disability was greater than 50 percent. During the hearing, Williamson testified before an administrative-law judge (ALJ) that his injury left him unable to perform five of his seven required tasks as a hod carrier, or roughly 78 percent of his job. A labor-market consultant testified that Williamson was unable to perform 65 percent of a hod carrier’s typical duties due to his injury. Williamson’s doctor testified that under the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (the AMA guides), Williamson had a 50 percent loss of function in his leg. However, the doctor explained that the AMA guides do not measure an injured person’s ability to perform a specific job. The doctor agreed with Williamson’s assessment of his inability to perform his job-related tasks. The ALJ concluded that the AMA guides did not accurately reflect Williamson’s degree of impairment and concluded based on the evidence at the hearing that Williamson had a 70 percent permanent impairment of function. Slover sought review in the Arizona Court of Appeals, which reversed the ALJ’s award. The court stated that the ALJ should not have considered Williamson’s inability to perform his specific job absent a medical expert’s determination that the AMA guides did not adequately rate Williamson’s impairment. Williamson appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Feldman, C.J.)
What to do next…
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 724,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.