top of page
Search

Pima County v. Industrial Commission of Arizona - Memorandum Decision - Arizona Court of Appeals - April 14, 2025

  • Writer: Christopher S. Norton, Esq.
    Christopher S. Norton, Esq.
  • Apr 17
  • 2 min read


ree

Facts:

Guadalupe Sanchez, a nutrition specialist for Pima County, sustained injuries in May 2022 after tripping over a small table at work. ​ She reported injuries to multiple body parts, including her lumbar spine. ​ Pima County initially denied her claim but later accepted it and closed it in August 2022 without permanent impairment. ​ Sanchez contested the closure, leading to four evidentiary hearings. ​ The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found Sanchez medically stationary as of April 27, 2023, with a permanent impairment to her lumbar spine, awarding her unscheduled permanent disability benefits and supportive care. ​ Pima County challenged the award, arguing the evidence was legally insufficient and Sanchez’s medical expert lacked foundation. 

​

Issue(s):

  1. Was the evidence supporting the ALJ’s findings on Sanchez’s stationary status and permanent impairment legally sufficient? ​

  2. Did the ALJ err in relying on Sanchez’s medical expert, Dr. Coury, whose opinion was partially based on another doctor’s findings? ​


Holding:

The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the ALJ’s award, finding that the evidence supporting Sanchez’s stationary status and permanent impairment was sufficient and that the ALJ properly relied on Dr. Coury’s testimony, supported by Dr. Curtin’s medical reports. ​


Key Takeaways:

  1. Competent Medical Testimony: The ALJ’s findings on stationary status and permanent impairment must be supported by competent medical testimony. ​ Here, the ALJ reasonably relied on Dr. Coury’s testimony and Dr. Curtin’s medical reports. ​

  2. Resolution of Conflicting Evidence: When conflicting medical evidence is presented, it is the ALJ’s responsibility to resolve the conflicts. ​ The ALJ’s resolution will not be disturbed unless wholly unreasonable. ​

  3. Use of Medical Reports: The ALJ can rely on medical reports submitted to the Industrial Commission, even if the physician did not testify at the hearing, as long as the reports constitute proper evidence. ​

  4. Combination of Expert Opinions: The ALJ may combine parts of expert testimony and medical evidence to arrive at a reasonable conclusion. ​

  5. Preservation of Issues: Pima County’s objections to Dr. Coury’s testimony were properly preserved for review because they were raised in its request for review before the Industrial Commission. ​


Read Full Decision: IC20240006memo.pdf

​

Comments

bottom of page