Fazzolari v. United Beer Distributors

761 P.2d 6, 93 Or. App. 103
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided September 14, 1988·No. WCB 85-16090; CA A45497·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

WARREN, J.

Employer petitions for review of our opinion in Fazzolari v. United Beer Distributors, 91 Or App 592, 757 P2d 857 (1988). We treat the petition as a petition for reconsideration, ORAP 10.10, and allow reconsideration for the purpose of amplifying our opinion. Employer contends that we incorrectly stated that claimant did not return to work until after August 12, 1985, when, in fact, he returned to work immediately after he was released for work on March 22, 1985. We reviewed this matter under ORS 656.298(6) only for substantial evidence. Although there is some evidence to suggest that claimant returned to work when he was released for work in March, 1985, there is also evidence to support the referee’s finding, which the Board affirmed, that claimant did not return to work until after August 12, 1985. We therefore adhere to our former opinion.

Reconsideration allowed; former opinion adhered to.

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

Fazzolari v. United Beer Distributors, 761 P.2d 6, 93 Or. App. 103 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

761 P.2d 6 (Fazzolari v. United Beer Distributors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bledsoe v. City of Lincoln City
455 P.3d 587 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2019)
SAIF Corp. v. Coburn
977 P.2d 412 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1999)
Fred Meyer, Inc. v. Bundy
978 P.2d 385 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1999)
Lebanon Plywood v. Seiber
833 P.2d 1367 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
Forshee & Langley Logging v. Peckham
788 P.2d 487 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1990)
Metro Machinery Rigging v. Tallent
764 P.2d 974 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)