Case law

Independent Paper Stock v. Wincer

100 Or. App. 625 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 7, 1990

By promulgating OAR 438-12-018, the Board exceeded its authority. … In Armstrong v.

Alvarez v. GAB Business Services, Inc.

72 Or. App. 524 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 6, 1985

Claimant petitions for review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board. … See Maarefi v. SAIF, 69 Or App 527, 531 , 686 P2d 1055 (1984). The Board agreed with the referee’s conclusion that Dr. Gilsdorf s January 24,1983, letter was a valid aggravation claim. ORS 656.273(3).

North Clackamas School District No. 12 v. North Clackamas Education Ass'n

54 Or. App. 211 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 12, 1981

Dist. v. … See Ostrer v. Pine-Eagle School Dist., supra, 40 Or App at 269, n 5 . In a recent case, Portland Assn. of Teachers v. School Dist.

Russell v. State Accident Insurance Fund

281 Or. 353 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 14, 1978

See Zuza v. Ford Motor Company, 84 NJ Super 588, 203 A2d 105 (1964), aff’d 44 NJ 320, 208 A2d 802 (1965); Englishman v. … . *360 See also Dodier v. State Dept. of Labor, 373 A2d 341 (NH 1977); Webb v. Hamilton, 78 NM 647 , 436 P2d 507 (1968).

Seeley v. Sisters of Providence

179 Or. App. 723 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 27, 2002

As we explained in *729 McTaggart v. … Conversely, we explained in Bronco Cleaners v.

Johnson v. State Accident Insurance Fund

267 Or. 299 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1973

Both the board and the circuit court held for petitioner on the merits and awarded attorney’s fees. … are not recoverable in such proceedings because the Injured Inmates Act does not provide for them within the Act itself nor by incorporation of the attorney’s fees provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. ① Johnson v.

Multnomah County School District v. Tigner

113 Or. App. 405 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 10, 1992

The Board denied that request, because it believed that it lacked jurisdiction to order reimbursement between insurers. In Western Employers Ins. v. … Corp. v. SAIF, 99 Or App *410 729, 733, 784 P2d 123 (1989). Accordingly, the Board did not err by concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to order reimbursement.

Willamette Industries, Inc. v. Titus

151 Or. App. 76 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 22, 1997

Roseburg Forest Products v. Long, 325 Or 305, 309 , 937 P2d 517 (1997) (citing Runft v. SAIF, 303 Or 493, 500 , 739 P2d 12 (1987)). … Roseburg Forest Products v. Long, 325 Or 305, 313 , 937 P2d 517 (1997). See also Beneficiaries of Strametz v. Spectrum Motorwerks, 325 Or 439,444-45 , 939 P2d 617 (1997); Boise Cascade Corp. v.

Santos v. Caryall Transport

171 Or. App. 467 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 20, 2000

See Gainor v. SAIF, 51 Or App 869, 870 , 627 P2d 41 (1981); Bailey v. Morrison-Knudsen, 5 Or App 592, 598-600 , 485 P2d 1254 (1971). Here, employer initiated the appeal to the Board and prevailed at that level. … Deaton v.

Boyd v. SAIF Corp.

115 Or. App. 241 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 16, 1992

There were conflicting medical opinions about the genesis of claimant’s disability, and the Board’s selection of one as opposed to the other was not error. Armstrong v. … For example, in Albee v.

Collins v. States Veneer, Inc.

14 Or. App. 114 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 30, 1973

The circuit court reversed the order of the Board and denied compensation for the claimed aggravation. … Hamilton v. SAIF, supra at 1302. “* * # [T]he written opinion is a condition precedent to the right to have a hearing on a claim * * Larson v. Compensation Department, supra at 482.

State v. Lowry

59 Or. App. 338 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 15, 1982

This case is a sequel to State v. Brown, 291 Or 642 , 634 P2d 212 (1981). … had not raised it below, but the court cited State v.

Collins v. Hygenic Corp. of Oregon

86 Or. App. 484 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 22, 1987

Claimant seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that affirmed the referee and denied his claim for medical services. 1 We reverse. Claimant worked as a “snorkel bender.” … v.

M & M Woodworking Co. v. State Tax Commission

217 Or. 161 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 27, 1959

In *183 this instance the taxpayers appealed to the Board of Equalization for Multnomah County and that board sustained the value as fixed by the assessor. … Bank v. Board of Equalization, 109 Or 669 , 222 P 341 , is a similar case.

Glines v. Bain

157 Or. 358 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1937

How would the board of directors acquire $335,000 without transferring, in violation of the statute, funds which had been budgeted for a particular purpose? Appellants strongly rely upon Stoddard, v. … Tuttle v. Beem, 144 Or. 145 ( 24 P. (2d) 12 ), is also cited by appellants. That case involved the liabilities of a third class district for the digging of a well. Teachers ’ salaries were not involved.

Swint v. City of Springfield

305 Or. App. 679 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 5, 2020

See Walker v. … Instead, the board discussed our decision in French-Davis v.

Westrope v. Employment Department

144 Or. App. 163 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 16, 1996

Simplot Co. v. Employment Div., 102 Or App 523 , 795 P2d 579 (1990); Silver Eagle Mfg. Co. v. Employ. Div., 95 Or App 635 , 770 P2d 607 (1989); and Pembroke v. … I could’ve, yes.” *170 We cautioned, in Bremer v.

State v. Coughennower

95 Or. App. 699 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 1989

State v. Brown, 301 Or 268 , 721 P2d 1357 (1986). To apply that exception, we must determine if the police had probable cause to believe that the automobile contained contraband or evidence of a crime. State v. … Brown, supra, 301 Or at 276 .

Lane Education Service District v. Swanson

71 Or. App. 328 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 12, 1984

In Bagley v. … Bradburn v. Wasco County, supra; Bagley v. Beaverton School Dist., supra.

MacKey v. MacKey

1 Or. App. 177 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 7, 1969

Brown, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Brown & Burt, Salem. BRANCHFIELD, Judge. This is an appeal by the plaintiff, Linda L. … Henry v. Henry, 156 Or. 679 , 69 P.2d 280 (1937); Gonyea v. Gonyea, supra. The reasons behind the foregoing rules have been set out with great clarity in Bennehoff v.