Case law

De Los-Santos v. Si Pac Enterprises, Inc.

278 Or. App. 254 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 11, 2016

Citing Boeing Aircraft Co. v. Roy, 112 Or App 10 , 827 P2d 915 (1992), and K-mart v. … See generally ORS 656.268; see also SAIF v.

Wilson v. Saint Helens School Dist. 29J

335 Or. App. 695 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 30, 2024

Moreover, a board order must be supported by “substantial reason.” Taylor v. SAIF, 295 Or App 199, 203, 433 P3d 419 (2018), rev den, 365 Or 194 (2019). … On review, claimant argues that our decision in Sullivan v.

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. Noffsinger

80 Or. App. 640 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 13, 1986

The Board affirmed without elaboration. … In Stark v. State Industrial Acc.

State v. Palomo

256 Or. App. 498 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 8, 2013

State v. Davis, 254 Or App 387, 388 , 292 P3d 666 (2012). … See State v.

State v. Allen

16 Or. App. 456 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 19, 1974

Defendant contends that this prosecution. for criminally negligent homicide is barred under the principles of State v. Brown, 262 Or 442 , 497 P2d 1191 (1972). … State v.

State v. Lovern

234 Or. App. 502 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 31, 2010

State v. Brown, 310 Or 347, 355 , 800 P2d 259 (1990). … Defendant did not reference the relevant standards of assessing the validity of scientific evidence — State v. Brown, 297 Or 404 , 687 P2d 751 (1984), or State v.

Waveseer of Oregon, LLC v. Deschutes County

308 Or. App. 494 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 13, 2021

Nehmzow v. Deschutes County, 308 Or App 533, 479 P3d 340 (2021). 498 Waveseer of Oregon, LLC v. … Jones v. Willamette United Football Club, 307 Or App 502, 514, 479 P3d 326 (2020). 502 Waveseer of Oregon, LLC v.

DeBoard v. Meyer

285 Or. App. 732 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 24, 2017

Id. at 258 ; see, e.g., Horizon Air Industries, Inc. v. … SAIF v. Williams, 281 Or App 542, 543 , 381 P3d 955 (2016) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Watt v. SAIF

317 Or. App. 105 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 20, 2022

Bank v. … Here, the board found that employer did not mandate claimant’s walk or direct her route. See Hearthstone Manor v.

Peek v. Thompson

160 Or. App. 260 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 28, 1999

The Board’s attorney’s legal opinion was that its hands were tied. See O’Bremski v. Maass, 905 F2d 281, 285 (9th Cir 1990). The Board has authority to adopt rules applicable to parole. ORS 144.050. … See, e.g., Griffith v. Blatt, 158 Or App 204, 211 , 973 P2d 385 (1999); Docken v. Ciba-Geigy, 101 Or App 252 , 790 P2d 45 , rev den. 310 Or 195 (1990). The Board amended these rules effective April 5, 1990.

Portland Ass'n of Teachers v. Portland School District No. 1

51 Or. App. 321 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 23, 1981

No. 17 of Sherman County v. Powell 203 Or 168 , 279 P2d 492 (1955); Holman Transfer Co. v. City of Portland, 196 Or 551 , 249 P2d 175 (1952). … Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Co., supra; Corvallis Sch. Dist v. Corvallis Education Assn., supra; Portland Teachers v. School District, supra.

Roadhouse v. Employment Department

283 Or. App. 859 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 23, 2017

Van Rijn v. … Jenkins v. Board of Parole, *866 356 Or 186, 195, 197 , 335 P3d 828 (2014) (describing holding of Springfield Education Assn. v. School Dist., 290 Or 217 , 621 P2d 547 (1980)). See also Campbell v.

Armstrong v. Cupp

67 Or. App. 295 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 7, 1984

Penrod/Brown v. Cupp, 283 Or 21, 24 , 581 P2d 934 (1978). … In Penrod/Brown v.

SAIF Corp. v. Williams

281 Or. App. 542 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 12, 2016

.]”); SAIF v. … ’s award”); Driver v.

State v. Bailey

258 Or. App. 18 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 14, 2013

The Oregon Supreme Court has not addressed the matter since Dempster , which was decided eight years before Brown . In State v. … United States v. Ceccolini, 435 US 268, 276 , 98 S Ct 1054, 1060 , 55 L Ed 2d 268 (1978) (citing Brown, 422 US at 603 ).

SAIF v. Chavez-Cordova

314 Or. App. 5 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 18, 2021

See Halfman v. … The board found: 8 SAIF v.

State v. Clowdus

326 Or. App. 36 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 17, 2023

For pur- poses of that determination, the “quantum” of evidence is irrelevant, State v. Brown, 306 Or 599, 603 n 3, 761 P2d 1300 (1988), as is the existence of contrary evidence, State v. … Brown, 306 Or at 604.

Okon v. Broadspire

348 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 25, 2026

OAR 436-035-0007(5)(b); see also SAIF v. … In response, employer contends that the board’s reference to “unambiguous findings” is consistent with our case law. See Hicks v.

Travelers Ins. Co. v. Arevalo (In re Comp. of Arevalo)

296 Or. App. 514 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 13, 2019

Group v. Huff , 149 Or. App. 298 , 307, 942 P.2d 853 (1997) (rejecting argument that the board erred because it addressed the issue of attorney fees sua sponte ). Our decision in Braden v. SAIF , 187 Or. … PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries , 317 Or. 606 , 610, 859 P.2d 1143 (1993). We do that using the analytical framework set out in State v.

Torres v. SAIF

321 Or. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 24, 2022

When reviewing the board’s evaluation of medical opinions, “we do not substitute our judgment for that of the board”; we determine only whether the board’s evaluation was reasonable. SAIF v. … Corkum v. Bi-Mart Corp., 271 Or App 411, 422, 350 P3d 585 (2015); Murdoch v.