Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Santos v. Caryall Transport

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 20, 2000No. 96-01407; CA A99312Published

1ConcurrenceArmstrong, J.

I agree with the majority that we erred in awarding attorney fees under ORS 656.382(2) to claimant for his attorney’s work in our court to reverse an erroneous Workers’ Compensation Board decision. Whether the Board can award attorney fees to claimant on remand and whether it can include in its award fees for the work before us are issues that have not been raised or argued by the parties. Consequently, the court cannot now decide them. I note, however, that ORS 656.382(2) arguably could provide authority for the Board to award fees to claimant for the work before us when the Board later…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Crowder v. AlumaflexCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  2. Santos v. Caryall TransportCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API