Moore v. State Accident Insurance Fund
This text of 530 P.2d 1254 (Moore v. State Accident Insurance Fund) 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.
Opinion
This workman’s compensation case presents only a fact question. Claimant underwent coronary bypass [225]*225surgery subsequent to a myocardial infarction which occurred on the job. The Fund does not dispute the fact that the myocardial infarction was a compensable injury, but argues that the need for the surgery did not proximately result from the infarction. The hearing officer and the Board found in favor of the claimant. The circuit court found to the contrary. Suffice it to say that we find that the evidence preponderates in favor of claimant’s position.
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
530 P.2d 1254, 20 Or. App. 224, 1975 Ore. App. LEXIS 1587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-state-accident-insurance-fund-orctapp-1975.