Legal Opinion · Dissent

SAIF Corp. v. Danboise

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 23, 1997No. 94-14711; CA A91148Published

1DissentLandau, J.

The Board began its description of the applicable standard by stating that claimant “has the burden of establishing that his cervical impairment is due to his compensable injury.” That is a correct statement of the law. ORS 656.214(5). The Board then qualified that correct statement of the law with the following sentence:

*554“Claimant may, however, meet that burden by presenting a treating physician’s or medical arbiter’s report that: (1) contains impairment findings that are consistent with [his] compensable injury; and (2) does not attribute those findings to causes other than the compensable…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bronco Cleaners v. VelazquezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  2. Paige v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  3. Senters v. SAIF Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API