Legal Opinion

SAIF Corp. v. Walker

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 2000No. WCB 93-07081; CA A89100; SC S44116PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarson, C. J.

In this workers’ compensation case, we must interpret the wording of ORS 656.273(1) (1995), 1 which sets out the requirements for establishing a worsened condition for the purpose of filing an aggravation claim. The Court of Appeals concluded that, under that statute, a worker must prove a “pathological” worsening of the underlying condition itself, rather than only a worsening of symptoms. SAIF v. Walker, 145 Or App 294, 305, 930 P2d 230 (1996). For the reasons that follow, we conclude that ORS 656.273(1) (1995) requires proof of a worsened condition; proof of a worsening of symptoms arising…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. ToevsOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Owens v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Gwynn v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Smith v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Lindell v. KaluginOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  2. A. G. v. GuitronOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Black v. ArizalaOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  4. SAIF Corp. v. JanuaryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  5. State v. HaleyOregon Supreme Court · 2023

24 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