Legal Opinion

American Medical Response v. Gavlik

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 20, 2003No. 01-00383; A118712PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KISTLER, J., pro tempore

Claimant is an on-call emergency medical technician who was exposed to hazardous chemicals when she stopped to report an automobile accident. The Workers’ Compensation Board (board) ruled that her injury arose out of and in the course of her employment. We affirm.

Claimant works up to 12 shifts a month as an on-call emergency medical technician (EMT). Each shift lasts 24 hours. Claimant begins each shift at 8:00 a.m., reporting to the station and preparing her ambulance for service. She then leaves the station house and returns to her home, where she remains for the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fred Meyer, Inc. v. HayesOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Robinson v. Nabisco, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Allen v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
  4. Iliaifar v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  5. Halsey Shedd RFPD v. LeopardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sandberg v. JC PENNEY CO. INC.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. Griffin v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  3. Davis v. SAIFCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API