Legal Opinion · Dissent

Randall v. Ocean View Construction Co.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 10, 2004No. 98-09289; A116878Published

1DissentWollheim, J.

The majority concludes that petitioner was not subject to the conclusive presumption of ORS 656.027(7)(b), the statute that the ALJ relied on in determining that petitioner was, in fact, an independent contractor. Choosing to focus on petitioner’s status rather than the nature of the work in order to determine whether he is a “nonsubject worker,” the majority’s conclusion may yield a kinder result, but it is an incorrect one. Because petitioner is, in fact, a nonsubject worker under ORS 656.027(7)(b), I respectfully dissent.

A historical overview of this problem will provide context for the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Woody v. WaibelOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Oregon Drywall Systems, Inc. v. Filings of the National Council on Compensation InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  4. Little Donkey Enterprises, Inc. v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. Little Donkey Enterprises, Inc. v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API