Case law

Gresham Grade Teachers Ass'n v. Gresham Grade School District No. 4

52 Or. App. 881 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 29, 1981

Wasco County v. AFSCME, 46 Or App 859 , 613 P2d 1067 (1980); see also, Labor Board v. Katz, 369 US 736 , 82 S Ct 1107 , 8 L Ed 2d 230 (1962). … Dist. v.

Stepp v. SAIF Corp.

78 Or. App. 438 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 9, 1986

Claimant seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order reversing a referee’s award of permanent total disability. … Waldroup v. J. C. Penney Co., 30 Or App 443, 448 , 567 P2d 576 (1977). That determination cannot be relitigated in an aggravation claim. Deaton v. SAIF, 33 Or App 261, 263 , 576 P2d 35 (1978).

Glide School District No. 12 v. Carell

39 Or. App. 727 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 23, 1979

See Lincoln County School District v. Mayer, 39 Or App 99 , 591 P2d 755 (1979). … See Reynolds School Dist. v. Martin, 30 Or App 39 , 566 P2d 196 (1977); Lincoln County School District v. Mayer, supra.

State v. Kennedy

196 Or. App. 681 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 2004

We compared State v. … Id.; see also State v.

Deyo-Bundy v. SAIF

313 Or. App. 393 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 14, 2021

PER CURIAM Affirmed. 394 Deyo-Bundy v. … “In determining whether the board’s order is sup- ported by substantial reason, we consider whether that order articulates the reasoning that leads from the facts found to the conclusions drawn.” Walker v.

Williams v. Cody

24 Or. App. 433 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 17, 1976

Accord, Valley Pipe Co. v. City of Albany, 215 Or 666, 667-68 , 300 P2d 411 , 303 P2d 503 (1959) (cases collected). … It does not contain a requirement that the School Board hold an evidentiary hearing. A formal hearing is conducted by the Fair Dismissal Appeals Board pursuant to ORS 342.905.

Fenimore v. Blachly-Lane Cnty. C.E.A.

297 Or. App. 47 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 10, 2019

See PGE v. … Safeway, Inc. v. OPEU , 152 Or. App. 349 , 357, 954 P.2d 196 (1998) ; see also Tanner v. OHSU , 157 Or.

Schaaf v. Eugene School District No. 4J

19 Or. App. 838 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 23, 1974

Interpreting a predecessor statute, in Funston v. … Makinson v. School District No. 4, 209 Or 232 , 304 P2d 1076 (1956), involved a teacher reduced from full-time to half-time employment. The school board contended there was a nonpersonal reason for the change.

Furrer v. Southwestern Oregon Community College

196 Or. App. 374 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 8, 2004

Swenson v. … In Bixler v.

Roseburg Forest Products v. Lund

245 Or. App. 65 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 17, 2011

Brumnett v. PSRB, 315 Or 402, 405-06 , 848 P2d 1194 (1993). … In that light, we understand employer to contend that the board mischaracterized the scope of its acceptance. We disagree. In Columbia Forest Products v.

SAIF Corp. v. Drews

117 Or. App. 596 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 20, 1993

See Tektronix, Inc. v. Nazari, 117 Or App 409 , 844 P2d 258 (1992). … The Board held that Wausau had met that burden and assigned responsibility for the condition to SAIF. *600 We agree witH the Board’s analysis.

Iliaifar v. SAIF Corp.

160 Or. App. 116 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 28, 1999

In Fred Meyer, Inc. v. … See Savin Corp. v.

Wayne-Dalton Corp. v. Mulford

190 Or. App. 370 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 5, 2003

The board based its ruling on two of our previous decisions, Templeton v. Pope and Talbot, Inc., 7 Or App 119 , 490 P2d 205 (1971), and Liberty Northwest Insurance Co. v. Meeker, 106 Or App 411 , 807 P2d 342 (1991). … More significantly, those cases were decided before PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

Derry v. Douglas County

132 Or. App. 386 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 18, 1995

LUBA concluded that the governing body’s interpretation of its ordinance to provide that a tie vote affirms the planning commission was entitled to deference under Gage v. … City of Portland, 319 Or 308 , 877 P2d 1187 (1994), and Clark v. Jackson County, 313 Or 508 , 836 P2d 710 (1992). LUBA accorded that deference and sustained that aspect of the county’s decision.

City of Albany v. Cary

201 Or. App. 147 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 10, 2005

Smirnoff v. SAIF, 188 Or App 438 , 72 P3d 118 (2003). … In Wayne-Dalton Corp. v.

State v. Martinez-Garcia

283 Or. App. 473 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 25, 2017

Brown v. United States, 356 US 148, 155-56 , 78 S Ct 622 , 2 L Ed 2d 589 (1958); Lea, 146 Or App at 482-83 . … See Redwine v.

In Re Ma-J.

228 Or. App. 580 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 27, 2009

As for the patdown, the state contends that, under the Supreme Court's decision in State v. … In State v.

Rogue Valley Medical Center v. McClearen

152 Or. App. 239 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 21, 1998

Employer relies on Fister v. … Volk v. America West Airlines, 135 Or App 565 , 899 P2d 746 (1995), rev den 322 Or 645 (1996). 2 We note that employer also assigns error to the Board’s PTD finding.

Bronco Cleaners v. Velazquez

141 Or. App. 295 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 29, 1996

We conclude that the Board did not err. Affirmed. 1 Petitioners on appeal are Bronco Cleaners and its insurer, Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. We refer to petitioners as employer. 2 Employer cites Allie v. … SAIF, 79 Or App 284, 288 , 719 P2d 47 (1986), and Edwards v.

Callaway v. Employment Department

225 Or. App. 650 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 11, 2009

Jones v. Employment Dept., 199 Or App 571, 575-76 , 112 P3d 453 (2005); Freeman v. Employment Dept., 195 Or App 417, 424 , 98 P3d 402 (2004). … Further, the department’s decision is the one rendered by the authorized representative, not the one made by either the ALJ or the board. McPherson v.