Case ID: or-app_62/html/0190-01.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 25,
    reversed and remanded March 9, 1983
    WALTON, Petitioner, v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION et al, Respondents.
    
    (82-AB-1320; CA A25656)
    659 P2d 1021
    John Silk, Eugene, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Bischoff & Strooband, Eugene.
    Michael D. Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, waived appearance for respondent Employment Division.
    No appearance for respondent Roberts Creek Water District.
    Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.
    PER CURIAM.
   PER CURIAM.

In this case, as in Paillette v. Employment Division, 59 Or App 598, 651 P2d 1087 (1982), we are unable to discern whether the decision of the Employment Appeals Board resulted from the Board’s appropriate exercise of its authority to review findings of its hearings officer de novo.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with Paillette v. Employment Division, supra.