Legal Opinion

Errand v. Cascade Steel Rolling Mills, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 23, 1994No. CV91283; CA A80487PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, P. J.

Plaintiff worked at defendant’s steel manufacturing plant. He has chronic infectious paranasal sinusitis, a preexisting condition that predisposes him to experience airway irritation. During his employment with defendant, plaintiff suffered transient irritation of the upper respiratory tract and a bout of paranasal sinusitis as a result of inhalation of substances found in his workplace. Plaintiff is a subject worker and defendant is in compliance with the Workers’ Compensation Law, ORS chapter 656. Plaintiff sought medical treatment and filed a workers’ compensation claim. Pursuant to ORS…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Carr v. U S West Direct Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  2. Reynolds v. HarbertOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Sumner v. CoeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  4. Metcalf v. CaseOregon Supreme Court · 1977

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Stratemeyer v. Lincoln CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Errand v. Cascade Steel Rolling Mills, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1995
  3. SAIF Corp. v. YokumCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  4. Bundy v. NuStar GP LLCOregon Supreme Court · 2023
  5. Jackson v. Fred Meyer, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

3 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