Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Jackson v. Tuality Community Hospital

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 28, 1994No. 88-13477; CA A80451Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRiggs, J.

I agree with the majority’s disposition of claimant’s argument regarding the Board’s application of the temporary rules. However, I do not agree with the majority’s conclusion that the Board correctly excluded the medical exhibits offered by claimant. Accordingly, I dissent.

ORS 656.268(7), which controls our disposition of this issue, provides:

“If the basis for objection to a notice of closure or determination order issued under this section is disagreement with the impairment used in rating of the worker’s disability, the director shall refer the claim to a medical arbiter appointed by the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Scheller v. Holly HouseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API