Case law

Sexton v. Persson

268 Or. App. 63 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 31, 2014

Board of Parole, 349 Or 461 , 245 P3d 119 (2010), and Janowski/Fleming v. … State v.

Reynolds Metals v. Thrasher

133 Or. App. 30 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 1995

Drews v. EBI Companies, supra, 310 Or at 149 ; Hammon Stage Line v. Stinson, 123 Or App 418, 422 , 859 P2d 1180 (1993).” Messmer v. … The Board’s order declining to award compensation for chondromalacia is on review to this court. See Thrasher v. Reynolds Metals, 133 Or App 13 , 889 P2d 1351 (1995).

Anderson v. West Union Village Square

44 Or. App. 685 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 25, 1980

Anderson v. West Union Village Square, 43 Or App 295 , 602 P2d 1092 (1979). Claimant petitioned for review in the Supreme Court, and under Rule 10.10 the case is automatically before us on reconsideration. … It would be procedurally unfair for the Board or this court to rule on such an issue when a claimant has been lulled into inaction by the employer’s apparent acquiescence. We recognized these principles in Neely v.

Naito v. Naito

178 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 14, 2001

See, e.g., Baker v. Commercial Body Builders, 264 Or 614, 628-29 , 507 P2d 387 (1973); see also Cooke v. Fresh Express Foods Corp., 169 Or App 101, 108-09 , 7 P3d 717 (2000); Chiles v. … See Naito v.

Clark v. Linn

98 Or. App. 393 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 13, 1989

In reaching its result, the Board relied on our opinion in Derryberry v. Dokey, 91 Or App 533 , 756 P2d 1255 , rev den *396 306 Or 661 (1988). There, the claimant contended that Bauman v. … To the extent that Derryberry v. Dokey, supra, suggests a contrary result, it is disapproved. 2 We conclude, therefore, that the Board erred in failing to address the question of compensability.

Tupper v. Fairview Hospital & Training Center

22 Or. App. 523 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 22, 1975

The United States Supreme Court held in Board of Regents v. … Board of Regents of Univ. & St. Col. of Ariz., 510 F2d 1324 (9th Cir 1975); Geneva Towers Tenants Org. v. Federated Mortgage Inv., 504 F2d 483 (9th Cir 1974); and Ring v.

Armstrong v. SAIF Corp.

65 Or. App. 809 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 30, 1983

We dismissed a previous appeal on the ground that it was not brought within 30 days from the mailing of the order of the Workers’ Compensation Board as required by ORS 659.295(8). Armstrong v. … As part of the petitioning process, claimant’s attorney submitted an affidavit to the court stating that the Chairman of the Workers’ Compensation Board had informed him, after our decision, that the Board had discovered

Currie v. Douglas County

308 Or. App. 235 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 30, 2020

Affirmed. 236 Currie v. Douglas County SHORR, J. Petitioner seeks judicial review of a final opinion and order of the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). … Relying on Beck v.

Shipley v. SAIF Corp.

79 Or. App. 149 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 30, 1986

SAIF requested Board review, and the Board held that SAIF has a lien and allocated the proceeds in accordance with the statute. … Any conflict as to what may be a just and proper distribution shall be resolved by the board.” In Wattenbarger v.

Care Ambulance Co. v. Multnomah County

97 Or. App. 618 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 26, 1989

See Standard Insurance Company v. Washington County, 93 Or App 78 , 761 P2d 534 (1988), pet for rev withdrawn 307 Or 326 (1989). That is the case here. … The court held in a related circuit court action (Care Ambulance Company, Inc. et al v. Multnomah County et al, Multnomah County Circuit Court No.

Turner v. Thompson

157 Or. App. 182 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 4, 1998

On appeal, plaintiff argues that the Board’s initial deferral was impermissible under our decision in Meadows v. … Jones v. Thompson, 156 Or App 226 , 968 P2d 380 (1998). Regarding his argument that the Board lacked authority to require him to undergo a psychological evaluation, we disagree.

State v. Dupree

3 Or. App. 303 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 23, 1970

She admitted she had forged his name to two checks, which she cashed, but denied an intent to defraud, stating she did so at his request because he was too drunk to sign his own name. *306 In State v. … Frye, 2 Or App 192 , 465 P2d 736 (1970), we said: “The standards which the trial court may expect of its probationers are set forth in Barker v.

Lane County School District 4J v. Oregon School Activities Ass'n

212 Or. App. 373 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 2, 2007

Liberty v. State of Oregon, 200 Or App 607, 613 (2005); see also Walter v. Scherzinger, 339 Or 408, 423-24 (2005) (giving ‘service’ its plain meaning); Keller v. Armstrong Industries, Inc., 197 Or App 450 (2005). … PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 611 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

Granner v. Fairview Center

147 Or. App. 406 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 16, 1997

The Board disagreed, 2 stating: “Although Dr. … Georgia-Pacific v. Piwowar, 305 Or 494, 501 , 753 P2d *410 948 (1988) (citing Bauman v. SAIF, 295 Or 788, 794 , 670 P2d 1027 (1983)).

State v. Mahon

17 Or. App. 177 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 15, 1974

As in State v. Brown, 1 Or App 322 , 461 P2d 836 (1969), Sup Ct review denied (1970), State v. Stanton, 7 Or App 286 , 490 P2d 1274 (1971), and State v. … See also, State v. Bauer, 16 Or App 443, 446 , 519 P2d 96 , Sup Ct review denied (1974). The officer’s visual observations were not, therefore, a constitutionally impermissible *180 search. State v. Brown; State v.

Newell v. Saif Corp.

134 Or. App. 625 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 31, 1995

As SAIF concedes, under the Supreme Court’s decision in Niccum v. … Accordingly, we remand for the Board to consider this question. With respect to claimant’s claim for symptoms in her right forearm and hand, we affirm the Board’s opinion without discussion. Reversed and remanded. .

SAIF Corp. v. Basham

112 Or. App. 6 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 4, 1992

Aetna Casualty Co. v. Aschbacher, 107 Or App 494 , 812 P2d 844 , rev den 312 Or 150 (1991). … The circumstances under which we may simply remand a case do not include an error of law of the type in Aetna Casualty Co. v.

Hall v. Employment Division

31 Or. App. 79 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 4, 1977

The foregoing facts are among those found by the Appeals Board. … See Cantrell v. Employment Division, supra.

Berliner v. Weyerhaeuser Co.

92 Or. App. 264 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 3, 1988

Berliner v. Weyerhaeuser Company, 90 Or App 450 , 752 P2d 1246 (1988). The initial issue is whether the Workers’ Compensation Board had authority to republish its October 8, 1986, order. … Employers and insurers cannot set off overpayments without authorization from the Division, a referee or the Board. Spivey v. SAIF, 79 Or App 568, 571 , 720 P2d 755 (1986); Forney v.

State v. Lusareta

270 Or. App. 102 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 25, 2015

Jennings v. … See State v.