Case law

Barr v. EBI Companies

88 Or. App. 132 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 28, 1987

Claimant petitions for review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order that affirmed the referee’s order denying benefits. … See Bergeron v. Ontario Rendering Co., supra.

SAIF Corp. v. Custer

181 Or. App. 199 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2002

SAIF v. Dobbs, 172 Or App 446, 451 , 19 P3d 932 , on recons 173 Or App 599 , 23 P3d 987 (2001). … SAIF also argues that the Board’s finding lacks substantial reason because the Board failed to explain why SAIF’s acceptance was not limited by the phrase “related to the fall of May 8, 1998.” See SAIF v.

Jackson v. Tuality Community Hospital

132 Or. App. 182 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 28, 1994

PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, supra. … See Edmundson v. Dept. of Ins. and Finance, 314 Or 291, 295 , 838 P2d 589 (1992); Ferguson v. U.S. Epperson Underwriting, 127 Or App 478 , 873 P2d 393 (1994). Affirmed.

Deaton v. Hunt-Elder

145 Or. App. 110 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 4, 1996

See Shoulders v. … In addition, the dissent points to two cases not cited by SAIF: Terlouw v. Jesuit Seminary, 101 Or App 493 , 790 P2d 1215 , rev den 310 Or 282 (1990); and Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v.

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. Luhrs

63 Or. App. 78 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 11, 1983

We had previously held in Holden v. … Fossum v. SAIF, 293 Or 252 , 646 P2d 1337 (1982). Under the Board’s rule, the claimant would be required to prove that the last employer’s place of business was a major cause of claimant’s condition.

Kokotan v. Employment Division

30 Or. App. 391 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 8, 1977

Claimant appeals from an order of the Employment Appeals Board (Board) holding that she voluntarily left work without good cause. 1 She contends that three of the Board’s factual findings are not supported by substantial … The Board, in its order, found facts and rationally explained its conclusion from those facts. Therefore, the order is valid. McCann v. OLCC, 27 Or App 487 , 556 P2d 973 (1976), rev den (1977). Affirmed.

DeNucci v. Henningsen

248 Or. App. 59 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 8, 2012

Mastriano v. Board of Parole, 342 Or 684, 693 , 159 P3d 1151 (2007); Joshi v. Providence Health System, 342 Or 152, 158 , 149 P3d 1164 (2006). … See Brown v. J. C.

Berliner v. Weyerhaeuser Co.

90 Or. App. 450 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 20, 1988

Armstrong v. … See Or Laws 1987, ch 884, § 12b; see also Armstrong v. Aston-Hill, 90 Or App 200 , 752 P2d 312 (1988).

Coleman v. SAIF Corp.

203 Or. App. 442 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 28, 2005

board’s order is not supported by substantial reason. … See, e.g., SAIF v.

Thomas v. Penfold

23 Or. App. 168 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 28, 1975

See, McPherson v. Cochran, 243 Or 399 , 414 P2d 321 (1966); Quillin v. Peloquin, 237 Or 343 , 391 P2d 603 (1964). … While still in existence the same board was asked to recheck its count and tally sheet to be certain they were correct. The counting board then corrected the error and duly certified the count.

Brunick v. Clatsop County

204 Or. App. 326 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 2006

Board of Regents v. … Board of Commrs., Wabaunsee Cty. v. Umbehr, 518 US 668, 675 , 116 S Ct 2342 , 135 L Ed 2d 843 (1996).

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. Zorich

94 Or. App. 661 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 11, 1989

Without comment, the Board affirmed. … In EBI Companies v. Kemper Group Insurance, 92 Or App 319 , 758 P2d 406 , reo den 307 Or 145 (1988), Kemper was held responsible and ordered to reimburse EBI for its claim costs.

Austin v. Premo

280 Or. App. 481 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 31, 2016

See Krummacher v. … .]”); accord, Strickland v.

Havi Group LP v. Fyock

204 Or. App. 558 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 15, 2006

See State v. McBroom, 179 Or App 120 , 124 n 2, 39 P3d 226 , rev den, 334 Or 397 (2002). … Oregon Peaceworks Green, PAC v.

Oregon School Activities Ass'n v. Stout

71 Or. App. 405 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 19, 1984

“A school board, whether state or local, has only the authority granted to it by statute. Monaghan v. School District No. 1, 211 Or 360 , 315 P2d 797 (1957); Neuhaus v. Federico, 12 Or App 314 , 505 P2d 939 (1973). … See also Whipple v.

Smith v. Bend Metropolitan Park & Recreation District

247 Or. App. 187 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 14, 2011

In Vokoun v. … As we explained in McComb v.

Pogorelc v. Employment Division

23 Or. App. 555 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 15, 1975

The Board found that claimant failed to accept “available suitable work” when it was offered (ORS 657.176(2)(e)). … The Board reviews the evidence de novo on the record. Stevenson v. Morgan, 17 Or App 428, 431 , 522 P2d 1204 (1974). The analysis of the Board properly applied the standards established by OES 657.190 and 657.195.

Rogers v. Cascade Pacific Ind.

152 Or. App. 624 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 25, 1998

We conclude that the Board did not err in holding that claimant’s cervical injury was not a compensable consequential injury under ORS 656.005(7)(a)(A). As we discussed in our decision in Hames, and later in Robinson v. … Fenton v. SAIF, 87 Or App 78 , 741 P2d 517 , rev den 304 Or 311 (1987).

Metropolitan Property & Casualty v. Harper

168 Or. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 7, 2000

See State v. Brown, 297 Or 404, 409 , 687 P2d 751 (1984) (expert testimony is admissible if it is relevant and helpful to the trier of fact). … See Brown, 297 Or at 705.

State v. Haydon

116 Or. App. 347 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 12, 1992

Pacific P. & L. v. Tax Com., 249 Or 103, 110 , 437 P2d 473 (1968). … See ORS 137.121; State v. Seals, 113 Or App 700 , 833 P2d 1344 (1992); State v. Davis, 113 Or App 118 , 830 P2d 620 (1992).