Legal Opinion

Bi-Mart Corp. v. Allen

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 8, 1999No. 98-02759; CA A104789PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, P.J.

Employer seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order denying its motion for sanctions after claimant sought to enforce a penalty award. ORS 656.295 and ORS 656.298. We review for errors of law, ORS 183.482(8)(a), and for abuse of discretion, ORS 183.482(7), and affirm.

Claimant has an accepted claim for a back strain with employer and a herniated disc condition that employer denied on the ground that it was unrelated to the accepted claim. In a previous hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) set aside the denial and assessed a 25 percent penalty pursuant to ORS 656.262(11).…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. STATE EX REL. GONZALEZ v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  2. Dental v. City of SalemCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API