Legal Opinion
Fuls v. SAIF Corp.
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided May 25, 1995No. WCB 91-01005, 90-17213; CA A76999; SC S41662PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.
In this case we are called on to decide whether claimant’s mental disorder resulting from an occurrence at work is an “injury” or an “occupational disease” for purposes of the Workers’ Compensation Law. See ORS 656.005(7) (regarding compensable injuries); 1 ORS 656.802 (regarding occupational diseases). 2 We also must decide whether claimant’s mental disorder was compensable. The Court of Appeals affirmed an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) denying compensability. Fuls v. SAIF, 129 Or App 255, 879 P2d 869 (1994). For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
The facts are not…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- James v. State Accident Insurance FundOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- Bakker v. Baza'r, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Mathel v. Josephine CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- DiBrito v. SAIF Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Weyerhaeuser Co. v. WodaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Holdren v. General Motors Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1998
- Whitlock v. Klamath County School DistrictCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- SAIF Corp. v. FalconerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
- Vaughn v. Marion CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.