SAIF Corp. v. Tull
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
*451EDMONDS, J.
SAIF seeks judicial review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order that held claimant’s bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome compensable. We affirm.
SAIF makes multiple assignments of error. It first contends that the Board erred in refusing to remand the case to the referee for admission of evidence about when it mailed a 1988 denial letter to claimant. Remand by the Board to a referee for additional evidence is a matter of discretion. Muffett v. SAIF, 58 Or App 684, 687, 650 P2d 139 (1982). SAIF argues that its failure to submit the exhibits before or during the hearing was due to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bauman v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1983
- Johnson v. Spectra PhysicsOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- Stovall v. Sally Salmon SeafoodOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- Booth v. Tektronix, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
- SAIF Corp. v. AbbottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Columbia Forest Products v. WoolnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society v. BonhamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- SAIF Corp. v. DobbsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- SAIF Corp. v. MizeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- TriMet v. WilkinsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.