Case law

Cameron Logging v. Jones

109 Or. App. 391 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 30, 1991

Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co., 90 Or App 200, 205 , 752 P2d 312 (1988). Although the order contains explicit findings of fact, it does not explain why they lead to the Board’s conclusions. … Misallocation of the burden of proof is a procedural error, Harris v.

Kienow's Food Stores, Inc. v. Lyster

79 Or. App. 416 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 21, 1986

See Gallea v. Willamette Industries, 56 Or App 763 , 643 P2d 390 (1982). … The conclusions of the referee and the Board are amply supported by the record.

American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 75, Local 2043 v. City of Lebanon

265 Or. App. 288 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 4, 2014

The board relied upon OPEU v. … Specifically, the union cites National Labor Relations Board v.

State v. Jones

109 Or. App. 235 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 16, 1991

In State v. … The reference to the parole board is overbroad. The sentence should have solely referred to the discretion of the court. Accordingly, we overrule the portion of Noble that pertains to the parole board.

O'Brien v. Employment Division

35 Or. App. 773 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 22, 1978

The applicable rule was stated in Stevenson v. … The Board’s findings of fact are supported by the requisite amount of evidence and its conclusion based on those findings is correct as a matter of law. See, Baker v.

Chapman v. Employment Division

32 Or. App. 127 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 16, 1978

The Employment Appeals Board reviews decisions of the referee de novo on the record and can enter its own order. Stevenson v. Morgan, 17 Or App 428 , 522 *131 P2d 1204 (1974). … Our review in this case is limited to a search for substantial evidence and rational reasoning. 2 McCann v. OLCC, 27 Or App 487 , 556 P2d 973 (1976), rev den (1977).

Mar Pacifico, Inc. v. Department of Fish & Wildlife

148 Or. App. 310 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 11, 1997

Mar Pacifico is the owner of the vessel F/V El Camino, which is the subject of this permit proceeding. … to use the F/V El Camino to fish for Dungeness crab in Oregon coastal waters pursuant to ORS 508.921 to ORS 508.941.

Johnson v. Saif Corp. (In re Comp. of Johnson)

291 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 28, 2018

Claimant asserted further that, in Schleiss v. … Schleiss , 354 Or. at 643 -44 , 317 P.3d 244 (citing Olson v. State Ind. Acc. Com. , 222 Or. 407 , 414, 352 P.2d 1096 (1960) ). In Mize v. Comcast Corp-AT & T Broadband , 208 Or.

Estate of Strametz v. Spectrum Motorwerks, Inc.

135 Or. App. 67 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 21, 1995

In determining whether a claimant’s occupational disease is work-related, the Board should consider all employment exposure, including out-of-state employment exposure. Silveira v. … Corp. v. Short, 102 Or App 495, 499 , 795 P2d 118 (1990); Holden v.

Mischel v. Portland General Electric Co.

89 Or. App. 140 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 30, 1987

The Board did not assess a penalty, because it determined that there were no amounts then due, but it awarded claimant attorney fees for employer’s late denial, citing Spivey v. SAIF, 79 Or App 568 , 720 P2d 755 (1986). … See Fink v. Metropolitan Public Defender, 67 Or App 79 , 676 P2d 934 , rev den 296 Or 829 (1984).

Willamin a School District 30J v. Willamina Education Ass'n

60 Or. App. 629 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 8, 1982

The Board further relied on Brewer v. Allstate Insurance Co., 248 Or 558 , 436 P2d 547 (1968); Wagner v. Columbia Hospital Dist., 259 Or 15 , 485 P2d 421 (1971); and Corvallis Sch. Dist. v. … Assoc. v.

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Knapp

100 Or. App. 615 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 7, 1990

The Board affirmed. Employer did not pay benefits for temporary total disability, apparently reasoning, in reliance on Cutwright v. … In the first review, we affirmed the Board’s order of June 17, 1986, without opinion. Weyerhaeuser Company v. Knapp, 85 Or App 220 , 736 P2d 230 (1987).

SAIF Corporation v. Miguez

249 Or. App. 388 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 18, 2012

See ETU, Inc. v. … Compare Gienger v.

Kuhn v. SAIF Corp.

73 Or. App. 768 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 22, 1985

SAIF petitioned for Board review. Relying on our opinion in Giesbrecht v. SAIF, 58 Or App 218 , 648 P2d 70 (1982), the Board first determined that it was improper for the referee to find Dr. … Garbutt v. SAIF, 297 Or 148, 151 , 681 P2d 1149 (1984); Hoke v. Libby, McNeil & Libby, 73 Or App 44, 46 , 697 P2d 993 (1985). Dr.

Grudle v. State Accident Insurance Fund

4 Or. App. 326 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 7, 1971

See Graham v. State Ind. Acc. Com., 164 Or 626 , 102 P2d 927 (1940). … In Graham v. State Ind. Acc. Com., supra, the Oregon Supreme Court cited with approval the following language from Greseck v.

Stueve v. Everett

11 Or. App. 18 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 25, 1972

Winslow v. … However, in City of Portland v.

Silveira v. Larch Enterprises

133 Or. App. 297 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 8, 1995

Claimant seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) affirming employer’s denial of his claim. He argues that the Board erred in its treatment of his out-of-state employment with employer. … See Wootten v. Stadeli Pump & Construction, 108 Or App 548 , 816 P2d 689 (1991); Olson v. EBI Co., 78 Or App 261 , 715 P2d 1348 (1986); Miville v. SAIF, 76 Or App 603 , 710 P2d 159 (1985).

Constantine v. Employment Department

200 Or. App. 677 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 27, 2005

, claimant contends that the board’s conclusion does not follow from its findings of fact, that the board’s decision is inconsistent with Employment Department policy, and that the board’s decision is inconsistent with both … Ponder v. Employment Dept., 171 Or App 435, 448 , 15 P3d 602 (2000).

Miltenberger v. Howard's Plumbing

93 Or. App. 475 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 19, 1988

See Employment Div. v. Western Graphics Corp., 76 Or App 608, 612 , 710 P2d 788 (1985). Claimant’s condition worsened in August, 1985, over six years after the date of the nondisabling injury. … The Board was not estopped from exercising its own motion jurisdiction.

Oliver v. Norstar, Inc.

116 Or. App. 333 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 12, 1992

We agree with the Board that, when the misconduct is such that a penalty may be assessed under ORS 656.262(10), no fees are available under ORS 656.382(1). See Martinez v. … Accordingly, we agree with the Board that attorney fees are not available under ORS 656.382. Affirmed.