Case ID: or-app_49/html/0999-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      THORNTON, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted November 24,
    affirmed without opinion December 29, 1980
    In the Matter of the Compensation of Richard L. Anderson, Claimant. ANDERSON, Petitioner, v. STATE ACCIDENT INSURANCE FUND CORPORATION, Respondent.
    
    (No. 79-2302, CA 18329)
    620 P2d 983
    Kenneth D. Peterson, Jr., Eugene, argued the cause for petitioner. On the brief were Evohl F. Malagon, and Mala-gon, Velure & Yates, Eugene.
    Darrell E. Bewley, Appellate Counsel, State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were K. R. Maloney, General Counsel, and James A. Blevins, Chief Trial Counsel, State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation, Salem.
    Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Thornton and Buttler, Judges.
    THORNTON, J., dissenting opinion.
   THORNTON, J.,

dissenting.

In my view there was sufficient evidence to establish that claimant’s present worsened back condition is the result of his 1975 injury. Ryan v. SAIF, 19 Or App 142, 526 P2d 1038 (1974). This conclusion was supported by sworn testimony of the claimant and corroborated by competent medical evidence, including the opinion of his treating physician.

I am persuaded that this workman has a bona fide aggravation of a prior injury. The fact that claimant continued to work for for a period of time before his worsened condition finally compelled him to seek treatment should not be a basis for rejecting this claim. Claimant should not be penalized for choosing to continue working and not seeking medical treatment sooner for the increasing pain he had been suffering for the preceding several months.

Accordingly, I would remand for a redetermination of the extent of claimant’s present disability.