Legal Opinion

Matter of Compensation of Welch

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 7, 1984No. 82-01160; CA A30608PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

Claimant appeals an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board which reversed the referee and held that claim - ant was not permanently and totally disabled. We reverse.

In this case, in which claimant does not exhibit total physical incapacity, we are involved with the so-called “odd-lot” doctrine, under which a disabled person may remain capable of performing work of some kind but still be permanently disabled due to a combination of medical and non-medical disabilities which effectively foreclose him from gainful employment. Such nonmedical considerations include age, education, adaptability…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gettman v. State Accident Insurance FundOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Livesay v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  3. Smith v. Brooks-Scanlon, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Clark v. Boise Cascade Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  2. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. SimpsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  3. Bruce v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  4. Hurlburt v. Tecton Laminates Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  5. Topolic v. Saif Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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