Legal Opinion

Robinson v. Omark Industries, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 27, 1980No. A7710 -14624, CA 14037PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*265SCHWAB, C. J.

Plaintiff sued defendant, Omark Industries, for injuries he suffered while working on Omark’s premises. Defendant alleged that workers’ compensation was plaintiff’s sole remedy and that it was therefore immune from tort liability. As contemplated by ORS 656.384(2), the trial court first tried and determined that defense, ruling in defendant’s favor. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

The facts are unique in Oregon appellate decisions, although probably common in some industrial and business settings. Plaintiff was employed by Employers’ Overload (EO), a "labor broker” or temporary help…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cornelison v. SeaboldOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Brazeale v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Whitlock v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Oremus v. OREGONIAN PUBLISHING COMPANYCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
  5. State v. RafalCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bechtel v. Crown Cent. Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Riley v. Southwest Marine, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1988
  3. Robinson v. Omark Industries, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Perry v. Express Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. Blacknall v. Westwood Corp., Developers & ContractorsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

11 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