Case law

Klamath Cty. v. Laborers Int. U. of Na, Loc. No. 915

21 Or. App. 281 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 5, 1975

See, Connecticut Light and Power Company v. Leedom, 174 F Supp 171 (DC Cir 1959); United Insurance Company of America v. N.L.R.B., 272 F2d 446 (7th Cir 1959). … * * Winters et al v. Grimes et al, 124 Or 214, 216-17 , 264 P 359 (1928). This definition has previously been adopted by this court to determine the appealability of orders of the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

SAIF Corporation v. Shipley

147 Or. App. 26 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 12, 1997

Volk v. America West Airlines, 135 Or App 565 , 899 P2d 746 (1995). The Board, in affirming the administrative law judge (ALJ), made the following findings, which are not challenged. … Corp. v. Yon, 137 Or App 413 , 904 P2d 645 (1995).

Porter v. Hill

108 Or. App. 418 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 21, 1991

Roseta and Brown, Roseta, Long & McConville, Eugene. Before WARREN, P.J., and RIGGS and EDMONDS, JJ. EDMONDS, Judge. … Bright v.

Mellis v. McEWEN, HANNA, GISVOLD, RANKIN & VAN KOTEN, EMPLOYERS, AND MISSION INS. CO.

74 Or. App. 571 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 17, 1985

Jordan v. Western Electric, 1 Or App 441, 443-44 , 463 P2d 598 (1970); see also Halfman v. SAIF, 49 Or 23 , 618 P2d 1294 (1980). … In this case, after applying the Jordan factors, the Board found that claimant’s injury was not work-related, in part because the Board did not believe that eating in a public cafeteria can be considered an ordinary risk

United Airlines v. Clark

240 Or. App. 13 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 2010

See Schoch v. Leupold & Stevens, 325 Or 112, 118 , 934 P2d 410 (1997) (substantial reason requirement necessitates “a sufficient explanation to allow a reviewing court to examine the agency’s action”). … We conclude that the record as a whole contains substantial evidence to support the board’s findings. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill, 90 Or App 200, 206 , 752 P2d 312 (1988). Affirmed.

Argonaut Insurance v. Rush

98 Or. App. 730 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 11, 1989

The Board disagreed with the referee’s legal conclusion and found that the evidence supported the claim’s compensability. We do not evaluate the credibility of witnesses. 1000 Friends of Oregon v. … Van Blokland v. Oregon Health Sciences University, 87 Or App 694, 698 , 743 P2d 1136 (1987). Consequently, we affirm the Board’s conclusion that claiihant’s medical services claim is compensable.

SAIF Corp. v. Myers

191 Or. App. 263 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 17, 2003

Citing our opinion in Multifoods Specialty Distribution v. … Drews v. EBI Companies, 310 Or 134, 142 , 795 P2d 531 (1990).

McKinney v. G. L. Pine, Inc.

16 Or. App. 619 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 11, 1974

Larson v. Compensation Department, 251 Or 478 , 445 P2d 486 (1968). … Larson v. Compensation Department, supra.

State v. Ross

271 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 13, 2015

As explained below, the asserted errors either do not qualify as “plain error,” see State v. Brown, 310 Or 347, 355 , 800 P2d 259 (1990), or we decline to exercise our discretion to correct them, see Ailes v. … See State v.

Carroll v. Boise Cascade Corp.

138 Or. App. 610 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 24, 1996

MVD, 319 Or 259, 268 , 875 P2d 463 (1994); deParrie v. … England, 315 Or at 639 ; see also Smith v.

International Paper Co. v. Riggs

114 Or. App. 203 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 1992

Forney v. Western States Plywood, 297 Or 628, 632 , 686 P2d 1027 (1984). … See SAIF v. Bates, 94 Or App 666, 669, 767 P2d 87 (1989).

Peters v. Renfro

43 Or. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 26, 1979

Penrod/Brown v. … See Penrod/Brown v. Cupp, supra; Bekins v.

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Martinez

239 Or. App. 224 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 1, 2010

Employer requested review by the board, and the board affirmed. … State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 171-72 , 206 P3d 1042 (2009); PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

Dethlefs v. Hyster Co.

55 Or. App. 873 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 8, 1982

In SAIF v. … SAIF v.

Roseburg Forest Products v. Langley

156 Or. App. 454 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 7, 1998

See Mallon v. … Counts v. International Paper Co., 146 Or App 768, 771 [, 934 P2d 526] (1997), Brooks v. D & R Timber, 55 Or App 688, 692 [, 639 P2d 700 ] (1982).

Kolar v. B & C CONTRACTORS

36 Or. App. 65 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 6, 1978

The referee and the Board were correct in concluding he was temporarily out of the state incidental to his employment with B & C, an Oregon employer. Employer relies on House v. State Ind. Ace. … Smith v. Ed’s Pancake House, 27 *71 Or App 361 , 556 P2d 158 (1976); Minnesota Mining & Manuf. Co. v. SAIF, 27 Or App 747 , 556 P2d 1379 (1976); Barackman v.

State v. Koppenhafer

59 Or. App. 213 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 15, 1982

That this said premises is located on the south side of Echo Way and that the front door is dark brown wood which faces north. … The United States Supreme Court held in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 US 108 , 84 S Ct 1509 , 12 L Ed 2d 723 (1964), and Spinelli v.

Jamison v. Cupp

27 Or. App. 109 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 25, 1976

Massachusetts has since overruled the Kite rule, Brown v. Commissioner of Correction, 336 Mass 718, 147 NE2d 782 , 68 ALR2d 708 (1958). … Willis v. Brantley, 6 Ill App 3d 645, 285 NE2d 571 (1972); Stidham v. Sowers, 260 La 200, 255 So 2d 740 (1971); Green v. State, 245 A2d 147 (Me 1968); Brown v.

Windmill Inns of America, Inc. v. Cauvin

299 Or. App. 567 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 2, 2019

See Brown v. Guard Publishing Co., 267 Or App 552, 562, 341 P3d 145 (2014) (explaining that the court does not apply de novo review in the context of a motion for summary judgment) * * *.” … V.

Harris v. Nordquist

96 Or. App. 19 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 5, 1989

Seeborg v. General Motors Corporation, 284 Or 695 , 588 P2d 1100 (1978). … Oregonian Publishing Co. v. Board of Parole, 95 Or App 501 , 769 P2d 795 (1989).