With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the exception of the special concurring opinion in Flowers, not one of the cases refers to workmen’s compensation. Furthermore, we do not think the analysis or reasoning involved in determining the nature of other kinds of disability benefits is necessarily applicable to workmen’s compensation. Finally, A.R.S. § 23-1068 provides that workmen’s compensation benefits are not assignable and shall not pass to another person by operation of law. Arguably, the statute is an expression of legislative intent that the benefits are not to be assigned to the non-injured spouse upon dissolution of the marriage. However, our holding is not based solely on the provision of the statute. We hold that workmen’s compensation benefits paid to the injured worker after the dissolution 2d 513 (App.1977) (<HOLDING>). But see Rickman v. Rickman, 124 Ariz. 507,

A: holding military service disability payments are community property
B: holding disability benefits from us civil service are community property
C: holding that military retirement pay that had been waived by former husband to receive veterans disability benefits was not community property divisible upon divorce
D: holding veterans administration disability payments are separate property after dissolution of marriage
A.