Case ID: or-app_106/html/0484-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted February 15,
    reversed and remanded for reconsideration April 3, 1991
    In the Matter of the Compensation of Jimmie C. Ward, Claimant. Jimmie C. WARD, Petitioner, v. John A. MUSTOLA and SAIF Corporation, Respondent.
    
    (88-12202; CA A65570)
    808 P2d 109
    Gary L. Tyler, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Galton, Scott & Colett, Portland.
    John A. Reuling, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
    Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Rossman and De Muniz, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Claimant seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order affirming the referee’s decision that he is not permanently and totally disabled. Claimant contends that the Board’s order is inadequate for judicial review, because it does not contain findings sufficient to support its conclusion, and that the findings that the Board made are not supported by substantial evidence.

We agree that, in the light of the voluminous record and the conflicting evidence, the Board’s very sparse findings are not adequate, in and of themselves, to support its decision. The referee’s decision, which the Board affirmed, contains adequate findings and is supported by substantial evidence. If the Board intended to adopt the findings of the referee, it had to do so expressly. If that was not the Board’s intention, it had to make its own findings adequate, in and of themselves, to support its decision.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.