Case ID: or-app_145/html/0598-01.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 November 22, 1996,
    reversed and remanded for reconsideration January 22, 1997
    In the Matter of the Compensation of Harry T. McCrea, Jr., Claimant. Harry T. McCREA, Jr., Petitioner, v. ARRIOLA BROS., INC.; SAIF Corporation; and Weyerhaeuser Company, Respondents.
    
    (WCB 93-02507, 93-05231; CA A91991)
    930 P2d 1180
    James L. Edmunson argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Coons, Cole, Cary & Wing, P.C.
    John M. Pitcher argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent Weyerhaeuser Company.
    Michael O. Whitty argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents SAIF Corporation and Arriola Bros., Inc.
    Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Claimant seeks reversal of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) that upheld the denial of the claim by employer based on ORS 656.262(10), as amended by Oregon Laws 1995, chapter 332, section 28. In reaching its decision, the Board relied on its holding in Craig L. Hiatt, 47 Van Natta 2287 (1995), in which it incorrectly interpreted ORS 656.262(10). Hiatt v. Halton Company, 143 Or App 579, 922 P2d 1279 (1996); see Deluxe Cabinet Works v. Messmer, 140 Or App 548, 915 P2d 1053, rev den 324 Or 305 (1996). Similarly, the Board incorrectly interpreted ORS 656.262(10) in this case.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration. 
      
       Employer argues that claimant did not preserve this argument below and, thus, that we should not address it. However, the Board sua sponte applied ORS 656.262(10) to the facts of this case.
     
      
       We do not decide whether claim preclusion applies in this case.