Legal Opinion

Sweeden v. City of Eugene

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 8, 1989No. WCB 86-02493, 86-13988; CA A48111PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Claimant seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that affirmed the referee’s dismissal of her request for hearing as untimely. ORS 656.319(1)(a). We affirm.

The referee’s order states, in part:

“[T]he employer’s July 25, 1986 denial is approved, as the claimant’s Request for Hearing was not filed within 60 days after the employer issued the denial. The approval of the denial relates only to medical services received on or before the date of hearing.”

In her brief, claimant summarizes her contention:

“Claimant does not challenge the Referee’s finding that * * * [the] Request…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hamilton v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API