Maroulas v. State Industrial Accident Commission
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.
If plaintiff’s statement of the issue before this court is correct, there would be no room for controversy. It is elementary law that an officer clothed with judicial or quasi-judicial power cannot delegate that function; 15 C. J. 513, § 183, State v. Smith, 1 Or. 250; Moore v. Wilson, 84 Kan. 745 (115 Pac. 548).
We do not think that the statement of the issue here as placed by plaintiff and quoted above is correct. When an appeal has been taken from the decision of the State Industrial Accident Commission, it ceases to be clothed with discretion in the matter of the claim and becomes an…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Butterfield v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Johnson v. PrinevilleOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Moore v. WilsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
- Holst v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1926
- State ex rel. Blanchard v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rueda v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1946
- State Ex Rel. Crabb v. OlingerWashington Supreme Court · 1938