Diane's Foods v. Stephens

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Diane's Foods v. Stephens

893 P.2d 573, 133 Or. App. 707, 1995 Ore. App. LEXIS 567

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 12, 1995

DocketWCB 92-10499; CA A81346

StatusPublished

This text of 893 P.2d 573 (Diane's Foods v. Stephens) 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

Diane's Foods v. Stephens, 893 P.2d 573, 133 Or. App. 707, 1995 Ore. App. LEXIS 567 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this workers’ compensation case, employer seeks review of an order of the Board reversing the referee’s order that reduced claimant’s permanent partial disability (PPD) to zero. The Board reinstated the determination order award of 29 percent PPD because employer had failed to request reconsideration of that award under ORS 656.268(5).

Employer’s only argument is that ORS 656.268 is a jurisdictional statute under which reconsideration is a prerequisite to the Board’s acquiring jurisdiction to conduct a hearing. It argues that it does not matter which party initially requests reconsideration of the determination order and that it may properly raise any objections to the determination order award of PPD at the hearing. We rejected this same argument in Duncan v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 133 Or App 605, 894 P2d 477 (1995), in which we held that failure of a party to request reconsideration of a determination order will bar that party’s subsequent challenge to the determination order award at a hearing.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

In this workers’ compensation case, employer seeks review of an order of the Board reversing the referee’s order that reduced claimant’s permanent partial disability (PPD) to zero. The Board reinstated the determination order award of 29 percent PPD because employer had failed to request reconsideration of that award under ORS 656.268(5).

Employer’s only argument is that ORS 656.268 is a jurisdictional statute under which reconsideration is a prerequisite to the Board’s acquiring jurisdiction to conduct a hearing. It argues that it does not matter which party initially requests reconsideration of the determination order and that it may properly raise any objections to the determination order award of PPD at the hearing. We rejected this same argument in Duncan v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 133 Or App 605, 894 P2d 477 (1995), in which we held that failure of a party to request reconsideration of a determination order will bar that party’s subsequent challenge to the determination order award at a hearing.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

893 P.2d 573, 133 Or. App. 707, 1995 Ore. App. LEXIS 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dianes-foods-v-stephens-orctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack