From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCrea v. Arriola Bros., Inc.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jan 22, 1997
930 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)

Opinion

WCB 93-02507, 93-05231; CA A91991

Argued and submitted November 22, 1996.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration January 22, 1997.

Judicial Review from Workers' Compensation Board.

James L. Edmunson argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Coons, Cole, Cary Wing, P.C.

John M. Pitcher argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent Weyerhaeuser Company.

Michael O. Whitty argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents SAIF Corporation and Arriola Bros., Inc.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.


Claimant seeks reversal of an order of the Workers' Compensation Board (Board) that upheld the denial of the claim by employer based on ORS 656.262(10), as amended by Oregon Laws 1995, chapter 332, section 28. In reaching its decision, the Board relied on its holding in Craig L. Hiatt, 47 Van Natta 2287 (1995), in which it incorrectly interpreted ORS 656.262(10). Hiatt v. Halton Company, 143 Or. App. 579, 922 P.2d 1279 (1996); see Deluxe Cabinet Works v. Messmer, 140 Or. App. 548, 915 P.2d 1053, rev den 324 Or. 305 (1996). Similarly, the Board incorrectly interpreted ORS 656.262(10) in this case.

Employer argues that claimant did not preserve this argument below and, thus, that we should not address it. However, the Board sua sponte applied ORS 656.262(10) to the facts of this case.

We do not decide whether claim preclusion applies in this case.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.


Summaries of

McCrea v. Arriola Bros., Inc.

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jan 22, 1997
930 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)
Case details for

McCrea v. Arriola Bros., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Compensation of Harry T. McCrea, Jr., Claimant. Harry…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jan 22, 1997

Citations

930 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1997)
930 P.2d 1180

Citing Cases

Farmers Ins. Group v. Huff

We reject that argument because we have consistently held that the Board's review is de novo and that it may…