Legal Opinion

SAIF Corp. v. Pruitt

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 9, 2005No. 02-07445; A122515PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, J.

SAIF decided that employment with its insured, 4 R Equipment LLC, was not the major contributing cause of claimant’s back injury and consequently denied that the injury was compensable. An administrative law judge (ALJ) and then the Workers’ Compensation Board (board) disagreed. The board ordered SAIF to provide benefits. SAIF seeks review of that order. We affirm.

In 1984, claimant received treatment for a work-related back injury at L5-S1. He recovered almost completely, with minimal residual effects and no physical limitations. The compensability of that injury is not at issue. However, 15…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  2. Dietz v. RamudaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. Dietz v. RamudaOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Saif Corp. v. BryantCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. SAIF Corp. v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  2. InteliStaf Healthcare v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
  3. Slater v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API