Legal Opinion

Multnomah County v. Shults

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 1, 2011No. 0807243; A143577PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.

Employer Multnomah County seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board affirming an award of permanent partial disability to claimant. See ORS 656.214(2) (2007); OAR 436-035-0007 (Jan 1, 2006). Employer argues, inter alia, that the board’s order is based on an inference that is not supported by substantial reason. Specifically, employer argues that the board’s inference that a medical arbiter panel found that claimant’s impairments were due to his accepted condition is not supported by substantial reason. For the reasons explained below, we agree and reverse and remand.

Claimant,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Roseburg v. Roseburg City Firefighters, Local No. 1489Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Hicks v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  3. Hicks v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  4. Khrul v. Foremans CleanersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  5. SAIf Corp. v. AltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Harvey v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API