Galbraith v. L.A. Pottsratz Construction

The issue in this case is whether there was a denied claim pursuant to ORS 656.386(1). Because I believe the Board was correct in holding there was not a denied claim, I dissent.

The majority opinion writes that “[t]his case is legally indistinguishable” from Kimberly Quality Care v. Bowman, 148 Or App 292, 939 P2d 629 (1997). 152 Or App at 795. This is incorrect. The relevant facts of Kimberly Quality Care make it easily distinguishable from this case. In Kimberly Quality Care, the claimant specifically requested written acceptance or denial of her claim along with a notice of hearing. In…