Case law

LeFave v. SAIF Corp.

203 Or. App. 108 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 7, 2005

PER CURIAM Claimant seeks judicial review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that reversed an award of attorney fees to claimant. … While this case was pending on appeal, this court decided Rose v.

Johnson v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

55 Or. App. 638 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 24, 1982

See also, Hutcheson v. Weyerhaeuser, 288 Or 51 , 602 P2d 268 (1979). Our paraphrasing of the doctors’ testimony did not change the quantum of proof. … The Board’s denial was therefore correct.” Petition for reconsideration granted; former opinion modified and adhered to.

Leppanen v. Lane Transit District

181 Or. App. 136 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2002

In State v. … State v.

Faessler v. Turney

125 Or. App. 134 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 8, 1994

According to employers, this finding shows the Board’s desire to do “social justice” and is not rationally related to whether claimant was in the course and scope of employment. Armstrong v. … They rely on Underwood v.

Mogliotti v. Reynolds Metals Co.

67 Or. App. 142 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 22, 1984

The Board, however, affirmed the referee, ruling that claimant “did not comply with the requirements of ORS 656.245 and Rivers v. SAIF, 45 Or App 1105 , 610 P2d 288 (1980).” … See *147 Evans v. SAIF, 62 Or App 182, 187 , 660 P2d 185 (1983). We find that employer, on the facts here, may not refuse to pay for claimant’s surgery.

Smith v. Cadillac

33 Or. App. 21 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 12, 1978

The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, finding that the claimant had not sustained his burden of proof. The circuit court affirmed the Board and claimant appealed. … Iverson v. SAIF, 28 Or App 789 , 561 P2d 651 (1977). Dr. Eugene Kazmierski, an internist who was claimant’s treating physician, began seeing claimant in 1971 for general care.

Ristick v. Employment Division

55 Or. App. 990 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 8, 1982

Bell v. Emp. Div., 37 Or App 843, 850 , 588 P2d 654 (1978). … See, e.g., VanHorn v. Employment Div., 26 Or App 63 , 552 P2d 264 , rev den (1976); Diamond Fruit v. Employment Div., 26 Or App 617 , 553 P2d 1080 (1976).

Johnson v. Morgan

194 Or. App. 495 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 4, 2004

Johnson v. Brown, 194 Or App 486 , 95 P3d 235 (2004).

Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas County

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 25, 2024

.”); Kenagy v. … (Emphasis added.)); Leathers v.

DeLong v. Yu Enterprises, Inc.

170 Or. App. 609 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 1, 2000

In Moore v. … In Ducosin v.

State v. Macy

125 Or. App. 649 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 5, 1994

Relying on State v. … In State v.

In re the Marriage of Haggerty

280 Or. App. 733 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 8, 2016

Id. at 166 (quoting Brown and Brown, 259 Or App 618, 627 , 315 P3d 422 (2013), rev den, 355 Or 142 (2014)). … See Jones v.

Columbia Hills Development Co. v. Land Conservation & Development Commission

50 Or. App. 483 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 17, 1981

In Pohrman v. … See League of Women Voters v. Paulus, 287 or 509, 601 P2d 763 (1979); Pohrman v. Klamath County Comm., supra.

Waterwatch of Oregon, Inc. v. Water Resources Department

259 Or. App. 717 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 11, 2013

Wilber v. … Kerivan v.

State v. Moody

201 Or. App. 58 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 3, 2005

See State v. … In State v.

Burns Bros. v. Employment Division

133 Or. App. 56 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 1995

Co. v. Emp. Div. (Smith), 86 Or App 669 , 741 P2d 907 (1987), and Sun Veneer v. … We specifically noted in Sun Veneer v.

M. F. v. Baker

325 Or. App. 787 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 10, 2023

Brown and Kinney & Brown PC filed the brief for appellant. No appearance for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Powers, Judge, and Hellman, Judge. POWERS, J. … M. v.

Barbera v. State

271 Or. App. 525 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 3, 2015

To the extent that petitioner argues that the alleged inaccurate advice from his criminal trial lawyer is sufficient to entitle him to invoke the escape clause, that argument is foreclosed by Brown v.

Paul v. Personnel Division

28 Or. App. 603 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 22, 1977

Vollmer v. Schrunk, 242 Or 196 , 409 P2d 177 (1965) (Denecke, J., concurring specially). … See generally Myers v. Carter/Marquam Invest. Corp., 27 Or App 351 , 556 P2d 703 (1976). In Eatherly v.

Parmer v. Plaid Pantry 54

76 Or. App. 405 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 20, 1985

The proffered evidence completes the otherwise incomplete record, and the Board abused its discretion by not remanding the case to the referee. See Muffett v. … The order on reconsideration is appealable to this court under ORS 656.298(1) and Tektronix Corp. v. Twist, 62 Or App 602 , 661 P2d 562 , rev den 295 Or 259 (1983).