Legal Opinion
SAIF Corp. v. Williams
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided October 12, 2016No. 1200237; A155778PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGarrett, J.
Petitioners, SAIF Corporation and Baker County-School District #61, seek reversal of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that concluded that claimant had established the compensability of a “new medical or omitted medical condition” under ORS 656.267 for a thoracic spine Tarlov cyst.1 On review, petitioners contend that the board’s analysis is predicated on two factual errors regarding the medical evidence. Claimant concedes one of the errors but argues that any error was harmless. We conclude that the board’s opinion does contain two factual assertions that are not supported by the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- SAIF Corp. v. PepperlingCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
- SAIF Corp. v. CalderCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
- Barnett v. Saif Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- Luton v. Willamette Valley Rehabilitation CenterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Asten-Hill Co. v. ArmstrongCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- DeBoard v. MeyerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
- SAIF v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- Gage v. Fred Meyer Stores - Kroger Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
- Marsh v. Saif Corp. (In re Comp. of Marsh)Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
- Slater v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2017