From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Luedtke v. Greene

Oregon Court of Appeals
Sep 24, 1984
694 P.2d 1002 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

82-07607, 82-07911, 82-08067, 82-09328; CA A31426

On respondent — cross-respondent SAIF's motion to dismiss filed September 24, 1984, motion granted; judicial review dismissed February 6, 1985

Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, and Robert M. Atkinson, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, for motion.

Allan M. Muir, Portland, appeared contra.

Mark Luedtke, petitioner — cross-respondent pro se, no appearance contra.

Robert K. Udziela, on behalf of respondent — cross-respondent Kenneth L. Greene, no appearance contra.

Before Warden, Presiding Judge, Joseph, Chief Judge, and Van Hoomissen, Judge.


PER CURIAM

Motion granted; petition for judicial review dismissed.


Respondent Greene, claimant, moved to dismiss this judicial review on the ground that the order is not reviewable. The motion was denied. SAIF now moves to dismiss on the same ground, and respondent Van Port Mfg. requests a determination of jurisdiction. We have reconsidered our denial of claimant's motion and have now concluded that we erred. Accordingly, the order denying claimant's motion is withdrawn and both motions to dismiss are allowed.

Claimant filed an aggravation claim against Kruesi Cutting (insured by SAIF) and a new injury claim against Luedtke. The referee held that claimant had sustained an aggravation, chargeable to Kruesi, and the Board reversed, holding that claimant had sustained a new injury, chargeable to Luedtke. The Board remanded the case to the referee to determine whether Luedtke is a noncomplying employer.

Luedtke seeks judicial review of the Board's holding Luedtke responsible for claimant's condition. It cites Price v. SAIF, 296 Or. 311, 675 P.2d 479 (1984), as authority that the Board's order here is a final, reviewable order. Price allows review of issues relating to a partial (denial of an injury occurring after an initial, related injury. Price does not authorize separating review of the issue of compensability from the issue of responsibility. See Dean v. SAIF, 72 Or. 16, 695 P.2d 90 (1985).

Motion granted; motion for judicial review dismissed.


Summaries of

Luedtke v. Greene

Oregon Court of Appeals
Sep 24, 1984
694 P.2d 1002 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Luedtke v. Greene

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Compensation of Kenneth L. Greene, Claimant; and In…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Sep 24, 1984

Citations

694 P.2d 1002 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)
694 P.2d 1002