Legal Opinion

Russell v. State Accident Insurance Fund

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1978No. TC 76-8-244A, CA 7359, SC 25312PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLent, J.

There are two issues in this case. The first is whether a claimant who suffers permanent partial disability but no loss of visual acuity (with maximum correction) as a result of trauma to the eye is entitled to any award of compensation for permanent disability under the Oregon Workers’ Compensation Law. 1 If the first issue is resolved in the claimant’s favor, the second issue is whether the award of compensation for permanent partial disability should be on a "scheduled” or "unscheduled” basis. We hold, with respect to the first issue, that the claimant is entitled to an award of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Sahnow v. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANYOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Kajundzich v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Walker v. State Compensation DepartmentOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Webb v. HamiltonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Dodier v. State of New Hampshire Department of LaborSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Clark v. U. S. PlywoodOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Workers' Compensation DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  3. Woodman v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Russell v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
  5. Shubert v. Blue ChipsOregon Supreme Court · 2000

4 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