Legal Opinion

SAIF Corporation v. Miguez

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 18, 2012No. 1000774; A147585PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHadlock, J.

This workers’ compensation case arises from the parties’ disagreement over the rating of claimant’s permanent partial disability (PPD), and it requires us to construe an administrative rule — OAR 436-035-0007(12) (2009) — that relates to the process by which such disability determinations are made. Claimant’s employer, Huntons Sure Crop Farm Service, and its insurer, SAIF Corporation, challenge an order in which the Workers’ Compensation Board applied the administrative rule and, in doing so, “increased claimant’s whole person impairment award for a right shoulder condition from 15 percent,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Don't Waste Oregon Committee v. Energy Facility Siting CouncilOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. SAIF Corp. v. Donahue-BirranCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  3. O'CONNOR v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. Gienger v. Department of State LandsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  5. ETU, Inc. v. Environmental Quality CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Godinez v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  2. SAIF Corp. v. BanderasCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. Wright v. Pub. Emps. Ret. Bd.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API