Reust v. Saif Corp.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Reust v. Saif Corp.

652 P.2d 884, 60 Or. App. 9, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 3540

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 27, 1982

DocketWCB No. 80-00038, CA A24193

StatusPublished

This text of 652 P.2d 884 (Reust v. Saif Corp.) 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.

Bluebook

Reust v. Saif Corp., 652 P.2d 884, 60 Or. App. 9, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 3540 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

THORNTON, J.

This is a case where the order of the Workers’ Compensation Board reversing the referee is defective in that it does not appear that the Board, in arriving at claimant’s unscheduled permanent partial disability, gave sufficient consideration to claimant’s loss of earning capacity. The Board reduced the hearings referee’s permanent partial disability award from 65 percent to 35 percent for a back injury.

The preponderance of medical opinion, as well as claimant’s own testimony, was that claimant is unable to return to any of his previous employments. He is no longer physically capable of doing custodian’s work, carpentry work, painting, farm labor, cannery work or mill work, all of which he did before his industrial accident. The evidence shows that his rehabilitation training as a locksmith fell short of preparing him for employment in that occupation.

On de novo review we conclude that the referee’s award should be reinstated.

Reversed; referee’s order reinstated.

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

THORNTON, J.

This is a case where the order of the Workers’ Compensation Board reversing the referee is defective in that it does not appear that the Board, in arriving at claimant’s unscheduled permanent partial disability, gave sufficient consideration to claimant’s loss of earning capacity. The Board reduced the hearings referee’s permanent partial disability award from 65 percent to 35 percent for a back injury.

The preponderance of medical opinion, as well as claimant’s own testimony, was that claimant is unable to return to any of his previous employments. He is no longer physically capable of doing custodian’s work, carpentry work, painting, farm labor, cannery work or mill work, all of which he did before his industrial accident. The evidence shows that his rehabilitation training as a locksmith fell short of preparing him for employment in that occupation.

On de novo review we conclude that the referee’s award should be reinstated.

Reversed; referee’s order reinstated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

652 P.2d 884, 60 Or. App. 9, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 3540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reust-v-saif-corp-orctapp-1982.