Legal Opinion
SAIF Corp. v. Cline
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided June 21, 1995No. WCB 93-00701; CA A83804PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that awarded claimant a penalty under ORS 656.268(4)(g). We reverse and remand for reconsideration.
Claimant suffered a compensable injury to his thumb. When that condition became medically stationary, employer issued a notice of closure, awarding 23 percent permanent scheduled disability for the thumb. Claimant requested reconsideration. He was examined by a medical arbiter. As a result of that examination, his award was increased to 42 percent permanent scheduled disability for the thumb and 6 percent for the hand.
Claimant…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
- England v. Thunderbird & Saif Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Foster v. State Accident Insurance FundOregon Supreme Court · 1971
- Nero v. City of TualatinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Carroll v. Boise Cascade Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Nero v. City of TualatinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- SAIF Corp. v. ValenciaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Schultz v. Springfield Forest ProductsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Environmental Quality CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.