Opinion

Henry v. State Accident Insurance Fund

  • 39 Or. App. 795
  • 593 P.2d 1251
  • 1979 Ore. App. LEXIS 2196
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Filed
Apr 23, 1979
Status
Published
Author
Thornton
On the bench
Schwab, Thornton, Lee, Gillette
Cited by
3 cases

The opinion

THORNTON,

dissenting.

Contrary to the majority, from my review of this record I find that claimant has carried his burden of establishing that he has a disabling foot condition, albeit of unknown cause, which was made progressively worse by his employment. This conclusion was supported by claimant’s treating doctor.

Before claimant’s symptoms became apparent initially, he was able to work long hours on his feet without pain, swelling and discoloration. Now those symptoms recur rapidly whenever he is on his feet very much, and his doctor has suggested that he avoid jobs which require continual standing and walking, for, the doctor opined, claimant’s condition is not medically stationary and will probably worsen if he takes a job requiring prolonged standing. Furthermore, while standing and walking are generally to be encountered in everyday life, one is not always subject, as was this claimant in his employment, to day-long standing and walking on wood, concrete and hard-packed earth.

True, the medical experts were divided in this case. I cannot, however, bring myself to deny this workman benefits because of this.

I agree with the Workers’ Compensation Board that claimant is entitled to compensation.

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.