Case law

Johnson v. Employment Department

187 Or. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2003

Id.] see Trebesch v. … Conversely, in City of Grants Pass v.

Port of Portland Ocip v. Cierniak

207 Or. App. 571 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 6, 2006

Bracke v. Baza’r, 293 Or 239, 248 , 646 P2d 1330 (1982). … Because the board left the inconsistency unaddressed, we cannot determine whether the board’s ultimate finding was valid. We considered a similar situation in SAIF v. January, 166 Or App 620 , 998 P2d 1286 (2000).

Troupe v. Labor Ready, Inc.

191 Or. App. 258 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 17, 2003

The board affirmed. … Ligatich v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 185 Or App 555, 561 , 60 P3d 1143 (2003). In this case, the board’s finding is supported by substantial evidence. Affirmed.

Blair v. State Accident Insurance Fund

21 Or. App. 229 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 28, 1975

Nolan v. SAIF, 7 Or App 46 , 489 P2d 974 (1971). … See: Pate v. S.I.A.C., 238 Or 499 , 395 P2d 438 (1964); Buell v. S.I.A.C., 238 Or 492 , 395 P2d 442 (1964); Hamrich v. S.I.A.C., 246 Or 229 , 424 P2d 894 (1967).

Grinstead v. Lacamas Laboratories, Inc.

212 Or. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 2, 2007

We agree with the board that the use of the word “may’ in subsection (1) means that the ALJ’s authority to dismiss a request for hearing for one of the reasons stated in that subsection is discretionary. See SAIF v. … With few exceptions, board reviews orders of the ALJ de novo. ORS 656.295(5), (6); see also Destael v. Nicolai Co., 80 Or App 596 , 723 P2d 348 (1986).

Lederer v. Viking Freight, Inc.

193 Or. App. 226 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 28, 2004

See Menasha Corp. v. Crawford, 332 Or 404, 413 , 29 P3d 1129 (2001). … , we do not review the board’s construction of the rule under the deferential standard of Don’t Waste Oregon Com. v.

Terlouw v. Jesuit Seminary

101 Or. App. 493 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 2, 1990

However, the Board dismissed the matter and did not make a decision on the merits. There is, therefore, no authority to award attorney fees under ORS 656.382(2). Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. … McKellips, 100 Or App 549, 550 , 786 P2d 1321 (1990); Agripac, Inc. v. Kitchel, 73 Or App 132, 698 P2d 69 (1985). Affirmed.

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. James

61 Or. App. 30 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 22, 1982

In the first, we affirmed the Board’s original order that found claimant’s disability to be compensable. James v. SAIF, 44 Or App 405 , 605 P2d 1368 (1980). … In SAIF v.

Messmer v. Deluxe Cabinet Works

130 Or. App. 254 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 14, 1994

Drews v. EBI Companies, supra, 310 Or at 149 ; Hammon Stage Line v. Stinson, 123 Or App 418, 422 , 859 P2d 1180 (1993). There is no argument in this case that the determination order is not final. … The Board erred in concluding that employer is not required to treat the degenerative condition, which has now worsened, as part of the compensable claim. Therefore, we remand to the Board for reconsideration.

State v. George

183 Or. App. 583 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 25, 2002

State v. Amini, 331 Or 384, 394 , 15 P3d 541 (2000). … State v.

Roy v. McCormack Pacific Co.

172 Or. App. 663 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 28, 2001

SAIF petitions for reconsideration of our opinion in this workers’ compensation case, Roy v. McCormack Pacific Co., 171 Or App 526 , 17 P3d 550 (2000). Claimant also cross-petitions for reconsideration. … Relying on our holding in Chaffee v.

Maddox v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

59 Or. App. 508 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 29, 1982

The Board based its conclusion on a rule it articulated in Harry McGarrah, WCB Case No. 79-05440 (1981). We have rejected the application of that rule in that case. McGarrah v. SAIF, 59 Or App 448 , 651 P2d 153 (1982). … We conclude, as in McGarrah v.

Dennis Uniform Manufacturing v. Teresi

115 Or. App. 248 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 16, 1992

In Priest v. … Under the rationale of Runft v.

Lewis v. CIGNA Insurance

192 Or. App. 658 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 7, 2004

Insurer cross-petitioned, renewing its argument that claimant’s failure to request an expedited hearing deprived the board of jurisdiction to hear the case. Relying on SAIF v. … We therefore reversed and remanded the case to the board without reaching claimant’s substantive arguments. Lewis v. Cigna Ins. Co., 174 Or App 531 , 26 P3d 165 (2001).

Atchley v. GTE Metal Erectors

149 Or. App. 581 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 10, 1997

However, citing Lebanon Plywood v. Seiber, 113 Or App 651 , [ 833 P2d 1367 ] (1992), the ALJ declined to award further [temporary] benefits.” The Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision. … Similarly, in Anodizing, Inc. v. Heath, 129 Or App 352 , 879 P2d 218 (1994), the employer appealed an order of *585 the Board awarding the claimant temporary disability benefits.

Boeing Aircraft Co. v. Roy

112 Or. App. 10 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 11, 1992

It relies on Weyerhaeuser Co. v. … It argues that that proof is required under Johnsen v.

Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Eight

126 Or. App. 244 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 2, 1994

We will reverse the Board’s decision to grant claimant’s request for a continuance if the Board acted outside the range of discretion delegated to it by law or if it acted inconsistently with its own rules, because those … ORS 656.298(6); ORS 183.482(8)(b); Bronson v. Moonen, 270 Or 469, 476 , 528 P2d 82 (1974); Harsh Investment Corp. v.

Double Tree Hotel v. Ansarinezhad

316 Or. App. 51 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 1, 2021

Vsetecka v. … Suchi v.

Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society v. Bonham

176 Or. App. 490 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 12, 2001

The Board found that it was not, but employer argues that it was. Whether claimant’s herniated disc constituted a new medical condition is a question of fact for the Board to determine. SAIF v. … Tull, 113 Or App 449 , 832 P2d 1271 (1992) (what is a condition is a question of fact that the Board must decide). See also Ware v.

Wilson v. State Accident Insurance Fund

48 Or. App. 993 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 27, 1980

In Horn v. Timber Products, Inc., 12 Or App 365 , 504 P2d 1059 (1973), claimant had received a permanent disability award which was paid in monthly installments. … We reaffirmed the Horn approach in Taylor v. SAIF, 40 Or 437 , 440, 595 P2d 515 (1979), a case which involved a similar factual issue.