Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Holden

838 P.2d 643, 115 Or. App. 390, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1759
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided September 30, 1992·No. 90-11918; CA A72743·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this workers’ compensation case, employer seeks review of an order of the Board affirming the referee’s decision to allow claimant’s claim for a knee injury. Employer argues that the Board erred in finding that the cause of the injury was work-related and in determining that the claim was supported by objective medical findings. ORS 656.005(7)(a), (19).

Substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that the knee injury was work-related. Additionally, the Board found that claimant’s doctor noted claimant’s subjective complaints of sharp pain, a catching sensation, particularly with twisting motions and, also, “notable patellar crepitus” in response to motion and internal rotation. The doctor’s report constitutes objective findings. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Ferrer, 114 Or App 471, 835 P2d 949 (1992).

Employer’s remaining argument does not require discussion.

Affirmed.

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

Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Holden, 838 P.2d 643, 115 Or. App. 390, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1759 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

838 P.2d 643 (Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Holden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

SAIF Corp. v. Williamson
882 P.2d 621 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1994)