Krajacic v. Blazing Orchards

737 P.2d 617, 85 Or. App. 477
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided May 20, 1987·No. WCB 84-02476; CA A37693·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

DEITS, J.

Claimant has filed a petition for review, which we treat as a petition for reconsideration. ORAP 10.10. In our opinion, Krajacic v. Blazing Orchards, 84 Or App 127, 733 P2d 113 (1987), we said:

“[The doctor’s] statement that claimant’s injury is permanent only indicates a waxing and waning of symptoms of the chronic condition for which he had received an award.”

We grant reconsideration only to correct a factual error. Petitioner correctly points out that he had not received an award on his claim. As noted in our opinion, 84 Or App at 131, the claim was classified as nondisabling. We still hold that claimant did not perfect' his aggravation claim within the statutory period.

Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.

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

Krajacic v. Blazing Orchards, 737 P.2d 617, 85 Or. App. 477 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).

737 P.2d 617 (Krajacic v. Blazing Orchards) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Stapleton
84 P.3d 1116 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2004)
Miller v. Wagon Trail Ranch
834 P.2d 460 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
Krajacic v. Blazing Orchards
752 P.2d 1299 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)
Avalos v. Bowyer
749 P.2d 1224 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1988)