Legal Opinion

Peterson v. State Compensation Department

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1970PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcALLISTER, J.

This appeal turns on the construction of ORS 656.386, ① providing for the allowance of attorney’s fees when a claimant prevails on appeal from the rejection of his claim for compensation. The claimant contends that he was entitled to an attorney’s fee when the Workmen’s Compensation Board remanded his case to a hearing officer for a hearing to determine whether he was entitled to compensation. The defendant State Compensation Department contends that a claimant is not entitled to an attorney’s fee until he finally establishes his right to compensation.

There is no dispute about the facts.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. DuggerWashington Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Printz v. State Compensation DepartmentOregon Supreme Court · 1969

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Saif Corp. v. AllenOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Shoulders v. SAIF Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Giltner v. Commodore Contract CarriersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  4. Cavins v. State Accident Insurance FundOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Standley v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API