Fred Meyer, Inc. v. Crompton
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board), claiming that the Board applied the wrong standard for determining compensability. We affirm.
The following facts are taken from the Board’s findings. In 1989, claimant suffered compensable carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), which was accepted and treated in 1990. For the next few years, claimant received no medical attention, yet she continued to “experience [ ] minimal chronic symptomatology which flared with over-usage.” Claimant became pregnant in 1994. She continued to work, but, due to the pregnancy, she experienced…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
- Albany General Hospital v. GasperinoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Beck v. James River Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- Roseburg Forest Products v. FergusonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
3Cited by9 opinions
- SAIF Corp. v. PepperlingCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
- Sprague v. United States BakeryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- Sprague v. United States Bakery, Saif Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- Fred Meyer, Inc. v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- SAIF Corp. v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.