Case law

McKeown v. SAIF Corp.

116 Or. App. 295 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 12, 1992

Claimant, an attorney, seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board holding that an injury that he sustained on his way to a legal éducation conference is not compensable. The facts are undisputed. … Applying the test of “work-connectedness” established in Rogers v. SAIF, 289 Or 633 , 616 P2d 485 (1980), and the factors in Mellis v.

Employment Division v. Albany Timber Carnival Ass'n

33 Or. App. 515 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 17, 1978

Co., Inc. v. Emp. … The Board’s first observation is apparently correct and the Board may well be correct as to what the legislature contemplated.

Powell v. Bunn

198 Or. App. 21 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 2, 2005

Powell I, 185 Or App at 338-39 ; Harris v. Board of Higher Education, 145 Or App 477, 478 , 930 P2d 873 (1996). … Mulier v.

Coddington v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

68 Or. App. 439 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 23, 1984

The Board also thought that Dr. Altizer’s testimony was not consistent with the facts of claimant’s return to school bus driving and her motorcycle travel during the same period. In Grable v. … The Board misinterpreted Dr. McGee’s testimony.

Elwood v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

67 Or. App. 134 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 22, 1984

ORS 656.802. 1 The referee and Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the insurer’s denial of the claim. We reverse and remand. In McGarrah v. … We reversed the latter decision in McGarrah v. SAIF, 59 Or App 448 , 651 P2d 153 (1982), before the Board’s decision here.

EBI Insurance v. CNA Insurance

95 Or. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 8, 1989

The Board affirmed that part of the decision. … In Bauman v.

Meister v. PERB

334 Or. App. 725 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 5, 2024

See James v. … See Harryman v.

Peacock v. Maass

99 Or. App. 678 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 13, 1989

See Bedell v. Schiedler, 307 Or 562 , 564 n 1, 770 P2d 909 (1989); Quinn v. Hanks, 192 Or 254, 258 , 233 P2d 767 (1951). Unlike in Kinney v. Maass, 98 Or App 590 , 779 P2d 632 (1989), and Peacock v. … See Penrod/ Brown v. Cupp, 283 Or 21, 28 , 581 P2d 934 (1978); see also Bedell v. Schiedler, supra n 1, 307 Or at 568-69 .

EBI Companies v. Department of Insurance & Finance

114 Or. App. 356 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 22, 1992

The Board disagreed. EBI paid the award and sought judicial review. We reversed, holding, in Independent Paper Stock v. Wincer, supra, that the Board lacked own motion authority to make a permanent disability award. … Whipple v. Howser, 291 Or 475, 481 , 632 P2d 782 (1981).

Torres v. Pacific Power and Light

84 Or. App. 412 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 18, 1987

Brown v. J.C. Penney Co., 297 Or 695 , 688 P2d 811 (1984); Schlosser v. Clackamas Water District, 60 Or App 617 , 655 P2d 194 (1982). … Or Const, Art VII (amended), § 3; Brown v. J. C. Penney Co., supra. Whether the rules were violated depends to a large extent on the interpretation of the term “constant watch.”

State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Orozco

129 Or. App. 148 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 20, 1994

Brown v. Texas, 443 US 47, 50-51 , 99 S Ct 2637 , 61 L Ed 2d 357 (1979). The minimally intrusive quality of blood extraction has repeatedly been noted. Cf. Winston v. … Under Brown v. Texas, supra, a search pursuant to ORS 137.076, undertaken to find a DNA “fingerprint,” is reasonable and does not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Ladd v. Hikes

55 Or. App. 801 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 2, 1982

With him on the brief was Flinn, Brown & Roseta, Eugene. Before BUTTLER, P.J., WARDEN, J., and HOLMAN, Senior Judge. [*] HOLMAN, Senior Judge. … See, e.g., North Pacific Lumber Co. v.

State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department of Multnomah County v. Cornett

121 Or. App. 264 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1993

"C: Brown house. "Weir: In the brown house? Were there different rooms in the brown house? "C: [Nods yes.] "Weir: What room did it happen in? "C: Mom's. "Weir: In mom's room. And where in mom's room did it happen, [C]? … Weir decided to videotape her next session with the girl. [4] The videotape *185 shows C, the foster mother and Weir playing a board game.

Shipley v. Salem School District 24J

64 Or. App. 777 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 5, 1983

Morrison v. State Board of Education, 1 Cal3d 214, 82 Cal Rptr 175, 461 P2d 375 (1969); Weissman v. Board of Ed. of Jefferson Cty. Sch. Dist., 190 Colo 414, 547 P2d 1267 (1976); Thomson v. Southwest Sch. … Dist., 12 Ohio Misc 288, 233 NE2d 143 (1967); Central York School Dist. v. Ehrhart, 36 Pa Commw 278, 387 A2d 1006 (1978); Board of Regents v. Martine, 607 SW 2d 638 (Tex Civ App 1980); see Denton v.

George v. Richard's Food Center

90 Or. App. 639 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 20, 1988

Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Company, 90 Or App 200 , 752 P2d 312 (1988). The opinion and order of the referee, which the Board approved without opinion, is adequate under the standards of review in ORS 656.298. Armstrong v. … Asten-Hill Company, supra; see also Younger v. City of Portland, 305 Or 346 , 752 P2d 262 (1988). Affirmed.

Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Oregon Portland Cement Co.

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

The Board reversed the order of the referee holding OPC responsible. Because some of the language in Bracke v. … The Board reversed, concluding that claimant’s condition was the result of an aggravation of the July, 1976, injury, for which Fireman’s Fund was responsible. Fireman’s Fund argues that, under the rule of Smith v.

State v. Ostrom

42 Or. App. 381 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 1, 1979

State v. … See State v. Starn, 37 Or App 914 , 587 P2d 1031 (1978). See also State v. Keys, 41 Or App 379 , 597 P2d 1266 (1979); State v. Ivie, 38 Or App 453 , 590 P2d 740 (1979). Affirmed. In State v.

Central Oregon LandWatch v. Deschutes County

326 Or. App. 439 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 2023

Indeed, “the statutory context of the LUBA review statutes lends particular force to the requirement of preser- vation of error before the board.” Id. (citing VanSpeybroeck v. … We revisited our Fountain Village opinion in Oregon Shores v. Board of County Commissioners, 297 Or App 269, 441 P3d 647 (2019).

Ferguson v. WOHL SHOE COMPANY

11 Or. App. 407 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 17, 1972

The Closing and Evaluation Division of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, the hearing officer and the Workmen’s Compensation Board all concurred in an award of 96 degrees. … to the opinion in Surratt v.

Adams v. Schrunk

6 Or. App. 580 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 21, 1971

The Colorado Supreme Court, for example, *586 said in Police Board v. … Copins, 98 Ariz 109, 402 P2d 541 (1965); Bellus v. Eureka, 69 Cal2d 336, 71 Cal Rptr 135, 444 P2d 711 (1968); Webb v. Whitley, 114 Ga App 153, 150 SE2d 261 (1966). In Harryman v.