1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 833 P.2d
  5. 833 P.2d 1371 (1992)
 

SAIF v. BURT

WCB 87-14262; 87-19512; 88-00583; 88-00587; 88-04786; 88-18591; 89-02307; CA A67493.

833 P.2d 1371 (1992)

114 Or. App. 12

In the Matter of the Compensation of William A. Burt, Claimant. SAIF CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. William A. BURT, Thriftee Thriftway, United Employers Insurance Company, Performance Insulation/SAIF Corporation, Anderson Forge, Princeton Property Management, dba Murray Place Apartments/SAIF Corporation and Safeway Stores, Inc., Respondents, and Jeff L. Adams, dba Adams Landscape Service, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided July 8, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Paul L. Roess, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Acker, Underwood, Norwood & Hiefield, Portland.

David C. Force, Salem, argued the cause for respondent William A. Burt. With him on the brief was Vick & Gutzler, Salem.

Janet M. Schroer and Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, Portland, filed the brief for respondents Thriftee Thriftway and United Employers Ins. Co.

Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., Virginia L. Linder, Sol. Gen., and John Reuling, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, filed the brief for respondents Performance Insulation and SAIF Corp.

Thomas M. Christ and Mitchell, Lang & Smith, Portland, filed the brief for respondent Anderson Forge.

Mark P. Bronstein, Portland, argued the cause for respondents Princeton Property Management/SAIF Corp. With him on the brief was Davis & Bostwick, Portland.

Kenneth L. Kleinsmith and Meyers & Radler, Portland, filed the brief for respondent Safeway Stores, Inc.

Allen W. Lyons, Portland, waived appearance for respondent Jeff L. Adams.

Before RICHARDSON, P.J., JOSEPH, C.J., and DEITS, J.

RICHARDSON, Presiding Judge.

SAIF, the statutory processing agent for the noncomplying employer, Jeff L. Adams, dba Adams Landscape Service (Adams), seeks review of the Workers' Compensation Board's order holding that Adams is responsible for claimant's low back condition. SAIF agrees that the Board correctly applied the last injurious exposure rule but contends that it improperly rejected a stipulation that Princeton Property Management, dba Murray Place Apartments...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases