Case law

Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Over

107 Or. App. 30 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 1991

In Jenkins v. … We quoted from Smith v. Workmen’s Comp. App.

Hewes v. State Accident Insurance Fund

36 Or. App. 91 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 6, 1978

We affirm the Workers’ Compensation Board’s denial of the claim for aggravation. See Bowman v. Oregon Transfer Company, 33 Or App 241 , 576 P2d 27 (1978). … However, Williams v.

Fisher v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc.

12 Or. App. 417 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 12, 1973

On the issue of causation, we agree with the hearing officer and the Board that claimant did not carry his burden. The general rule is that causal connection must be shown by expert medical testimony. Cf. Lemons v. … Wilson v. State Ind. Acc. Comm., 189 Or 114 , 219 P2d 138 (1950); Lindeman v. State Indus. Acc. Comm., 183 Or 245 , 192 P2d 732 (1948).

Carlson v. Valley Mechanical

115 Or. App. 371 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 30, 1992

The Board adopted the referee’s order. … As we explained in SAIF v.

Givens v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

61 Or. App. 490 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 2, 1983

The Board’s decision rested in part on two opinions from this court. Finley v. … Suell v.

Schlumberger Technologies, Inc. v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District

145 Or. App. 12 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 4, 1996

See Hanson v. Mosser, 247 Or 1, 9-10 , 427 P2d 97 (1967); Oregon Printing Ind. v. Chamberlain, 2 Or App 401, 405-07 , 467 P2d 657 , rev den (1970). … Robinson v. School District No. 1, 92 Or App 627, 631-32 , 759 P2d 1116 (1988); Payne v.

State v. Williams

232 Or. App. 303 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 9, 2009

For example, in State v. … However, in State v.

Fink v. Metropolitan Public Defender

65 Or. App. 88 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 12, 1983

A claimant is not obligated to repay compensation paid pending review by the board or appeal to this court, even if the board or court determines that compensation should not have been allowed. ORS 656.313(2). … The Board subsequently assessed the claim under the standard established in SAIF v. Gygi, 55 Or App 570 , 639 P2d 655 , rev den 292 Or 825 (1982), which this court decided between the hearing and the Board’s review.

State v. Herrin

123 Or. App. 117 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 8, 1993

State v. Brown, 301 Or 268 , 721 P2d 1357 *121 (1986). … Brown held that police may search a car without a warrant, if it is mobile when stopped and there is probable cause to believe that it contains seizable items. 301 Or at 276 .

Progress Quarries v. Vaandering

80 Or. App. 160 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 2, 1986

The Board correctly concluded that, in such a case, liability is assigned to the claimant’s employer at the time that the disease results in disability. Boise Cascade Corp. v. Starbuck, 296 Or 238 , 675 P2d 1044 (1984). … Petitioner cites Miville v.

Wesockes v. Powers School District No. 31

57 Or. App. 652 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 9, 1982

Finally, petitioner refers to our footnote in Humphreys v. … Humphreys v. Bethel School District, No. 52, 55 Or App 777 . 639 P2d 1297 (1982). The footnote has no precedential significance.

Nance v. Oregon State System of Higher Education

23 Or. App. 558 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 15, 1975

Papadopoulos v. Bd. of Higher Ed., supra. … Schlichting v. Bergstrom, 13 Or App 562 , 511 P2d 846 (1973).

Benaman v. Andrews

213 Or. App. 467 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 20, 2007

We review de novo, Hanzo v. deParrie, 152 Or App 525 , 953 P2d 1130 (1998), rev den, 328 Or 418 (1999); Boyd v. … Secor Investments, LLC v.

White v. Premo

286 Or. App. 123 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 2017

See, e.g., Jones v. … See Hayward v.

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. McCullough

92 Or. App. 204 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 20, 1988

On June 18, 1986, we reversed the Board, Weyerhaeuser Co. v. McCullough, 80 Or App 98 , 720 P2d 769 , rev den 302 Or 158 (1986), and held that the claim was not compensable. … ORS 656.313; 5 United Medical Lab v. Bohnke, 81 Or App 144 , 724 P2d 884 (1986); Hutchinson v. Louisiana-Pacific, 67 Or App 577, 581 , 679 P2d 338 , rev den 297 Or 1370 (1984). Affirmed.

Basmaci v. Stanley Works

187 Or. App. 337 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 24, 2003

Claimant seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board on remand from our opinion in Basmaci v. … We agree with the board that the claim was not perfected.

Rutherford v. Armstrong

31 Or. App. 1319 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 27, 1977

See Masters v. … Petitioner contends in one assignment of error that the Board failed to consider paragraph (c) quoted above. We disagree. The Board’s findings include the following: "3.

Gordineer v. Bellotti

100 Or. App. 102 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 17, 1990

The Board declined. … Miller, 197 Or 354 , 251 P2d 876 (1952); Reynolds v. State Board of Naturopathic Exam,., 80 Or App 438 , 722 P2d 739 (1986).

Polk County Deputy Sheriff's Ass'n v. Polk County

104 Or. App. 738 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 19, 1990

This is a judicial review of an Employment Relations Board (ERB) decision. We affirm. Petitioners are Polk County, Polk County Board of Commissioners and the Polk County Sheriff (collectively, County). … See AFSCME v. Executive Dept., supra, 52 Or App at 485-86 . Affirmed. The present version of the rule shifts that obligation to the parties.

Leedy v. Knox

34 Or. App. 911 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 20, 1978

Therefore, this case is remanded to the Workers’ Compensation Board to determine the extent of claimant’s disability at the time of the original determination order and to award compensation accordingly. Russell v. … The Board has not elected to do so.