HEWLETT-PACKARD CO. v. TOY

99-01934 and 98-09995; A108244

23 P.3d 1015 (2001)

174 Or. App. 275

In the Matter of the Compensation of Dorothy E. Toy, Claimant. HEWLETT-PACKARD CO., Petitioner, v. Dorothy E. TOY, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Decided May 9, 2001.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thomas W. Sondag, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Scott P. Monfils, Lane Powell Spears Lubersky and Hitt Hiller & Monfils.

Robert D. Carlson, Albany, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were James C. Egan, Albany, and Kryger, Alexander, Egan & Elmer.

Before EDMONDS, Presiding Judge, and ARMSTRONG and KISTLER, Judges.


KISTLER, J.

The Workers' Compensation Board (the Board) set aside employer's denial of claimant's occupational disease claim. Employer seeks review, arguing that the medical opinion on which the Board relied is not supported by objective findings. We affirm.

In June 1994, claimant began working as a process operator in employer's microchip fabrication facility. She worked 12-hour shifts for three to four days per week with a team of process operators. Each...

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