Crawford & Co. v. Liberty Northwest Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Crawford & Co. v. Liberty Northwest Insurance

866 P.2d 523, 126 Or. App. 110, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 45

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 19, 1994

DocketWCB 91-12437, 91-13835; CA A78445

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 866 P.2d 523 (Crawford & Co. v. Liberty Northwest Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crawford & Co. v. Liberty Northwest Insurance, 866 P.2d 523, 126 Or. App. 110, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 45 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Petitioners move for reconsideration of our opinion, 124 Or App 210, 859 P2d 1202, affirming an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board on the basis of our holding in SAIF v. Drews, 117 Or App 596, 845 P2d 215 (1993). Drews held that, in cases involving successive injuries, the employer with the last accepted claim need only prove that a new industrial injury involving the same condition materially contributed to claimant’s condition, in order to shift responsibility to a subsequent employer under ORS 656.308(1). However, the Supreme Court subsequently reversed our decision in Drews and held that the employer with the last accepted claim must prove that the new injury at a subsequent employer is the major contributing cause of the need for treatment in order to shift responsibility to the later employer. SAIF v. Drews, 318 Or 1, 860 P2d 254 (1993). In view of the Supreme Court’s decision, we allow reconsideration, withdraw our opinion and reverse and remand to the Board for reconsideration under the proper standard.

Reconsideration allowed; opinion withdrawn; reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

Petitioners move for reconsideration of our opinion, 124 Or App 210, 859 P2d 1202, affirming an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board on the basis of our holding in SAIF v. Drews, 117 Or App 596, 845 P2d 215 (1993). Drews held that, in cases involving successive injuries, the employer with the last accepted claim need only prove that a new industrial injury involving the same condition materially contributed to claimant’s condition, in order to shift responsibility to a subsequent employer under ORS 656.308(1). However, the Supreme Court subsequently reversed our decision in Drews and held that the employer with the last accepted claim must prove that the new injury at a subsequent employer is the major contributing cause of the need for treatment in order to shift responsibility to the later employer. SAIF v. Drews, 318 Or 1, 860 P2d 254 (1993). In view of the Supreme Court’s decision, we allow reconsideration, withdraw our opinion and reverse and remand to the Board for reconsideration under the proper standard.

Reconsideration allowed; opinion withdrawn; reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

866 P.2d 523, 126 Or. App. 110, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crawford-co-v-liberty-northwest-insurance-orctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack