Legal Opinion

Henry v. State Accident Insurance Fund

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 23, 1979No. 77-5377, CA 12110PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*797GILLETTE, J.

State Accident Insurance Fund (SAIF) seeks reversal of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) determination that claimant’s foot condition is compensable. Both SAIF and the referee had denied compensation. SAIF contends that claimant did not adequately establish that his condition was work-related. We agree and reverse.

The essential facts are as follows: When claimant was about 14, he began working as a farm laborer, which involved working twelve hours a day (on his feet all but half an hour), seven days a week, eight or nine months a year. He moved to Oregon in 1972 and began…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Weller v. Union Carbide Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1978

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hubble v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  2. Wright v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  3. Henry v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  4. Lavin v. Roseburg Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API