Legal Opinion

Oak Crest Care Center v. Bond

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 21, 1990No. WCB 86-17765; CA A61368PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Cigna Ins. Companies (Cigna) seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order that found it responsible for claimant’s compensable back injury, because it had initially accepted the claim and could not issue a “back-up denial” 1 under Bauman v. SAIF, 295 Or 788, 670 P2d 1027 (1983). Cigna contends that Bauman should not apply and that Crawford & Company Risk Management (Crawford) is responsible, because it provided coverage at the time of injury. We reverse and remand.

Claimant suffered a back injury on January 5, 1985, while employed as a nurse at employer Oak Crest Care Center. Cigna had…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bauman v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. PiwowarOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Ebbtide Enterprises v. TuckerOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. McGeheeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  5. Retchless v. Laurelhurst ThriftwayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. SAIF Corp. v. HansenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  2. Garcia v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  3. Camlu Retirement Center v. EvenhusCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
  4. Shearer's Foods v. HoffnagleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  5. SAIF Corp. v. ShafferCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API