HUERTA v. SCHOOL DIST. NO. 431

No. 17089.

773 P.2d 1130 (1989)

116 Idaho 43

Juan HUERTA, Claimant-Appellant, v. SCHOOL DISTRICT # 431, Employer, State Insurance Fund, Surety, and State of Idaho, Industrial Special Indemnity Fund, Defendants-Respondents.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

April 28, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Uranga & Uranga, Boise, for claimant-appellant. Louis L. Uranga argued.

Hyde, Wetherell, Bray & Haff, Boise, for respondent, School District # 431 and State Ins. Fund. Michael E. Wetherell argued.

Jim Jones, Atty. Gen., Boise, and Skinner, Fawcett & Mauk of Boise, for respondents, State of Idaho, Industrial Special Indemnity Fund. William L. Mauk, argued.


JOHNSON, Justice.

This is a worker's compensation case. The primary issue presented in this appeal is whether the Industrial Commission correctly concluded that the claimant (Huerta) did not sustain the burden of proving that he fell in the odd-lot category. We affirm the Commission's order. In doing so, we clarify the manner in which a claimant must establish a prima facie case of being an odd-lot worker. We also uphold the Commission's restriction of rebuttal evidence...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases