Petersen v. SAIF Corp.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1DissentButtler, P. J.
Because I agree with both the referee and the Board that claimant has not sustained her burden to prove that the on-the-job conditions, whatever they were, were the major contributing cause of her psychological problems, I would affirm. There are two parts to the problem.
First, assuming that the majority properly interprets McGarrah v. SAIF, 296 Or 145, 675 P2d 159 (1983), and Leary v. Pacific Northwest Bell, 67 Or App 766, 680 P2d 5 (1984), as holding that a claimant’s unrealistic perception of events that occurred on the job justifies compensation if the misperceptions resulted in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McGarrah v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Dethlefs v. Hyster Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Barrett v. Coast Range PlywoodOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- McGarrah v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
- Matter of Compensation of LearyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.