Opinion

Atwood v. State Accident Insurance Fund

  • 30 Or. App. 1009
  • 569 P.2d 52
  • 1977 Ore. App. LEXIS 1767
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Filed
Sep 19, 1977
Status
Published
Author
Tanzer
On the bench
Thornton, Tanzer, Richardson
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 83.0%

The opinion

*1011

TANZER, J.

This is a consolidated appeal by the State Accident Insurance Fund (SAIF) from awards of attorney fees by the circuit court in two workers’ compensation cases on entry of the mandates following appeal. The claims for compensation in both cases were denied by the hearings officer, the Workers’ Compensation Board and the circuit court. One claimant prevailed on appeal to this court;

1

the other appealed unsuccessfully to this court but prevailed in the Supreme Court.

2

There were no attorney fees ordered on appeal. On entry of the mandates, however, the circuit court awarded the claimants attorney fees of $2,900 and $5,250, respectively, for investigation and representation at all levels of the proceedings.

Attorney fees in workers’ compensation cases may be awarded only when expressly authorized by statute.

Uris v. Compensation Department,

247 Or 420, 429 , 427 P2d 753 , 430 P2d 861 (1967);

Schartner v. Roseburg Lumber Co.,

20 Or App 1, 5 , 530 P2d 545, 547 (1975);

Giese v. Safeway Stores,

10 Or App 452, 461 , 499 P2d 1364 , 501 P2d 982 , 983

rev den

(1972);

Bailey v. Morrison-Knudsen,

5 Or App 592, 598 , 485 P2d 1254, 1256 (1971). ORS 656.386 provides the only authorization for a circuit court to award attorney fees in workers’ compensation cases where a claimant brings the appeal. It reads in pertinent part:

"(1) In all cases involving accidental injuries where a claimant prevails in an appeal to the circuit court from a board order denying his claim for compensation, the court shall allow a reasonable attorney’s fee to the claimant’s attorney. * * *

"(2) In all other cases attorney fees shall continue to be paid from the claimant’s award of compensation except as otherwise provided in ORS 656.301 and 656.382.”

*1012

In these cases, claimants did not prevail in their appeals from the board orders to circuit court. The reasoning of the circuit judge that the entry of a mandate by the circuit court after a successful appeal justifies attorney fees for having prevailed in circuit court has no support in the statute. Cases in which a claimant prevails on appeal to this court or the Supreme Court fall into the category of "all other cases” in ORS 656.386(2), in which attorney fees must be paid from the claimants’ compensation awards.

Giese v. Safeway Stores,

10 Or App 452, 461-2 , 499 P2d 1364 , 501 P2d 982 , 983-4 (1972). The order awarding attorney fees was therefore unlawful.

Reversed.

1

Christensen v. SAIF,

27 Or App 595 , 557 P2d 48 (1976).

2

Atwood v. SAIF,

24 Or App 803 , 547 P2d 191 ,

reversed

276 Or 201 , 554 P2d 504 (1976).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.