Boyd v. SAIF Corp.

I agree with the majority that the Board properly rejected claimant’s occupational disease claim. Contrary to the majority, I think that the Board also properly rejected her injury claim.

The majority says:

“[A]s explained in Cope [v. West American Ins. Co., 309 Or 232, 785 P2d 1050 (1990)], employer control of the property is the rationale supporting the parking lot exception. The fact that an injury occurs on employer controlled premises while the employee is traveling to and from work makes the incident sufficiently work connected.” 115 Or App at 244.

There is language in Cope to support that…