Legal Opinion

Martin v. City of Portland

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 26, 2001No. 98-00466; A109341PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWollheim, J.

Claimant seeks judicial review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board holding that he had not carried his burden of proving that his work was the major contributing cause of his respiratory conditions. We review for substantial evidence and errors of law. ORS 183.482(8). Because the Board erroneously held that claimant’s evidence was insufficient under ORS 656.266 as a matter of law, we reverse and remand.

Claimant began working as a mechanic for the City of Portland (employer) in December 1993. Before starting that job, claimant had a history of childhood asthma. Besides a respiratory…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bronco Cleaners v. VelazquezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Seeley v. Sisters of ProvidenceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  2. In re the Marriage of KotlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. Elsea v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API