Case law

SAIF Corp. v. Wolff

148 Or. App. 296 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 11, 1997

Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board, contending that the Board erred in concluding that it is precluded from denying the compensa-bility of claimant’s osteochondritis dissecans. … Relying on our opinions in Messmer v. Deluxe Cabinet Works, 130 Or App 254 , 881 P2d 180 (1994), rev den 320 Or 506 (1995) (Messmer I), and Deluxe Cabinet Works v.

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).

Norgren v. PSRB

344 Or. App. 617 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 5, 2025

Norgren v. … Rolfe v. Psychiatric Security Review Board, 53 Or App 941, 947, 633 P2d 846, rev den, 292 Or 334 (1981) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Jensen

150 Or. App. 548 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 15, 1997

The Board affirmed. … PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

Zimbrick v. Morgan

4 Or. App. 138 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 10, 1970

The reasons for the circuit court’s reversal of the Appeals Board are: “* * # [T]he Findings of Fact of the referee, adopted by the appeals board, are supported by the evidence and are adopted by this court. … State Acting by and Through Oregon State Board of Higher Education v. Cummings, 205 Or 500 , 288 P2d 1036 ; Griffith v. Gardner, (9th cir.) 196 F2d 698.

Safeway Stores v. Owsley

91 Or. App. 475 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 15, 1988

Employer contends that the Board should not have reached that issue, because claimant waived it. We conclude that the Board was free to make any disposition of the case that it deemed appropriate. Destael v. … In our view, that issue has been resolved against claimant in Fink v.

Garoutte v. Mail-Well Corp.

200 Or. App. 508 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 6, 2005

Bennett v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 128 Or.App. 71 , 875 P.2d 1176 (1994). … ORS 174.010; PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or. 606, 611 , 859 P.2d 1143 (1993). See SAIF v. Henwood, 176 Or.App. 431 , 31 P.3d 1096 (2001). Claimant met his burden.

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. McCabe

74 Or. App. 195 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 3, 1985

done by the executive board. … Weller v. Union Carbide, 288 Or 27 , 602 P2d 259 (1979). Additionally, he must establish that the work conditions were the major contributing cause of the worsening of the preexisting condition. Dethlefs v.

Deep Photonics Corp. v. LaChapelle

303 Or. App. 699 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 29, 2020

Rebstock v. … Horton v.

Higgins v. Medical Research Foundation

48 Or. App. 29 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 2, 1980

Claimant appeals from an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) which held that claimant’s occupational disease claim was not timely filed. … Claimant did not brief this issue before the Board or this court. Since March 19, 1979, when this case was heard before the referee, the Supreme Court has decided Weller v.

Thomas v. Cascade Union High School District No. 5

98 Or. App. 679 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 11, 1989

This case is before v. for the second time. In Thomas v. Cascade Union High Sch. Dist. … Notice shall also be sent to the district school board and to the Fair Dismissal Appeals Board.”

Brotherton v. Morgan

17 Or. App. 435 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 20, 1974

Stevenson v. Morgan, supra. However, the claimant has the burden of going forward with the evidence until he makes a prima facie case. Cameron et al v. … Uniweld Products, Inc. v. Industrial Rel. Com’n, etc., 277 So 2d 827 (Fla App 1973); Berkowitz v. Levine, 41 App Div2d 791, 341 NYS2d 239 (1973); James v. Unempl. Comp.

Schoch v. State Accident Insurance Fund

9 Or. App. 100 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 21, 1972

of review, which board of review shall have jurisdiction to pass upon and decide such issues.” … Peterson v. Compensation Dept., 257 Or 369 , 477 P2d 216 (1970). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

Ventris v. Maass

99 Or. App. 85 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 25, 1989

A person on parole is not confined and is not serving a sentence in an institution 2 Compare State v. Smith, 95 Or App 76 , 767 P2d 480 , rev den 307 Or 719 (1989). … This case is distinguishable from Erbs v. Board of Parole, 90 Or App 253 , 752 P2d 318 (1988), where the Board attempted to parole an inmate on, rather than before, his good time release date.

McManus v. State Accident Insurance Fund

3 Or. App. 373 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 10, 1970

The hearing officer and Workmen’s Compensation Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) each had allowed 15 per cent. Claimant’s left knee was injured in an on-the-job accident on September 9, 1967. … When the Board reviewed, it went outside the record and considered Dr. Puziss’ report, a copy of which is attached to its opinion. This was error, for OKS 656.295 (3) and (5) limit the Board to the record.

State v. Guthrie

97 Or. App. 99 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 1989

The Nunnallys apparently never communicated that to Nevin, Lacey or Brown. … Fir Grove Cemeteries, Co., 282 Or 677, 687 , 581 P2d 75 (1978), quoting from Bennett v. City of Salem, et al, 192 Or 531, 541 , 235 P2d 772 (1951).

Audas v. Galaxie, Inc.

2 Or. App. 520 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 9, 1970

The Workmen’s Compensation Board affirmed this-award. … In Ryf v.

Kirkendall v. STAMPER'S J & J TIRE COMPANY

18 Or. App. 56 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 28, 1974

Swanson v. Westport Lumber Co., supra. Deaton v. … Deaton v. SAIF, supra.

Pendleton School Dist. v. State of Oregon

220 Or. App. 56 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 14, 2008

the state for the Board of Forestry to manage. … In Yancy , the Supreme Court explained that a controversy is justiciable when “there is an actual and substantial controversy between parties having adverse legal interests.” 337 Or at 349 (quoting Brown v.

Casteel v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

55 Or. App. 474 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 6, 1982

Hill v. SAIF, 38 Or App 13 , 588 P2d 1287 (1979); Lohr v. SAIF, 48 Or App 979 , 618 P2d 468 (1980). … ORS 656.214(5); Smith v. SAIF, 51 Or App 833, 836 , 627 P2d 495 (1981); *479 Harris v. SAIF, 55 Or App 158 , 637 P2d 1292 (1981.)