Porras v. Castle & Cooke, Inc.
This text of 755 P.2d 154 (Porras v. Castle & Cooke, Inc.) 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
Claimant seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order that affirmed the portion of the referee’s order awarding her 85 percent unscheduled permanent partial disability and modified the portion of the referee’s order regarding the date she became medically stationary. The petition for judicial review was filed on August 19, 1987. The scope of review, therefore, requires us to determine if the Board order is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co., 90 Or App 200, 205, 752 P2d 312 (1988). Because the Board order is inadequate for judicial review under the standards in Armstrong,1 we remand to the Board for reconsideration.
Remanded for reconsideration.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
755 P.2d 154, 91 Or. App. 526, 1988 Ore. App. LEXIS 1741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porras-v-castle-cooke-inc-orctapp-1988.