Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sheldon v. US Bank

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 12, 2016No. 1204027; A156285Published

1ConcurrenceLagesen, J.

I concur in the majority opinion’s decision to vacate and remand in this case, but not in its reasoning for doing so. In particular, I disagree that the board’s opinion indicates that it misunderstood the nature of a claimant’s “burden of eliminating idiopathic causes” under Phil A. Livesley Co. v. Russ, 296 Or 25, 32, 672 P2d 337 (1983) (Livesley), in a case in which a claimant seeks to establish the compen-sability of a workplace fall under the “unexplained fall” doctrine. Under that doctrine, as articulated in Livesley, where a fall in the workplace in unexplained — that is, the cause of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Phil A. Livesley Co. v. RussOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  2. McTaggart v. Time Warner CableCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. Erck v. Brown Oldsmobile & EBI CompaniesOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Blank v. US BankCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API