We spoke too soon. On March 25, we discussed vested rights and retroactive statutes, and the next day this case comes out. The Arizona Supreme Court holds that a more recent statutory amendment to the workers’ compensation act, which makes it easier for firefighters to have cancer covered, does not apply because the defense had a vested right under the earlier statute. The defense vested when the plaintiff filed the lawsuit. Yet another reason to re-read Hall.  Justice Montgomery authored a vigorous dissent. He has a different view on when and what rights vests. The “manifest intent” must consider that the statutory amendment was born from Arizona’s constitution and “necessarily operates with the intent and purpose to compensate as many employees as are qualified under the WCA” and “advances the remedial purpose of the WCA.” We got Grammatico goosebumps just reading this.

link to opinion