Legal Opinion

Timm v. Maley

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 22, 1993No. WCB 91-09137, 90-06629, 91-03931 and 91-02379 CA A77804PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, P. J.

Steven E. Timm, D.M.D., the noncomplying employer (Timm (NCE)), seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board, contending that the Board erred in concluding that SAIF, acting in its capacity as processing agent for Timm (NCE), (SAIF (NCE)), is responsible for claimant’s compensable occupational disease, rather than CNA Insurance Companies, which insured Timm before Timm became noncomplying.

Because the hearing in this case was convened on June 20,1990, the law in effect before the 1990 amendments to the Workers’ Compensation Law applies. Or Laws 1990 (Special Session), ch 2, §…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Matter of Compensation of BrackeOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  2. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. LuhrsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  3. United Pacific Insurance v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  4. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. GuptonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Reynolds Metals v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  2. Agricomp Insurance v. TappCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. SAIF Corp. v. KellyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  4. United Parcel Service v. LikosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. AIG Claim Services v. RiosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API