Case Title: Peters v. SIAC

Citation: 236 Or. 27, 386 P.2d 800

Docket Number: 

State: oregon

Court: Oregon Supreme Court

Date: 1963-11-13T00:00:00Z

Document:
Affirmed November 13, 1963.
Gerald C. Knapp, Assistant Attorney General, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Robert Y. Thornton, Attorney General, and Ray H. Lafky, Assistant Attorney General, Salem.
Berkeley Lent, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. *28 On the brief were Peterson, Lent & Paulson, Portland.
Before McALLISTER, Chief Justice, and ROSSMAN, SLOAN, DENECKE and LUSK, Justices.
AFFIRMED.
ROSSMAN, J.
This is an appeal by the defendant, State Industrial Accident Commission, from an order of the circuit court which sustained the plaintiff's motion for a new trial and thereby vacated a judgment previously entered by the court in the defendant's favor. The vacated judgment was based upon a jury's verdict. The plaintiff is a workman who sustained an injury while working for an employer who was subject to the act administered by the defendant commission.
The single assignment of error submitted by the defendant-appellant reads: "The court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for new trial."
In a prior proceeding instituted by the plaintiff he had established his right to receive from the defendant commission compensation for an injury that had befallen him. Still later he filed an Application for Increased Compensation on Account of Aggravation. The application was denied and thereupon the plaintiff appealed to the circuit court. The appeal to that court eventually led to the order which is now under consideration.
From the order of the circuit court which granted a new trial we quote the following:
ORS 17.325 states:
The court room is, therefore, the place for the trial judge to give his instructions to the jury.
ORS 17.305, in referring to the bailiff, states:
We believe that the procedure employed in this case, as revealed by the order from which we quoted, was in violation of the two above sections of our code. *30 Carson v. Brauer, 234 Or 333, 382 P2d 79, and State v. Kristich, 226 Or 240, 359 P2d 1106. A statement made to the jury by the trial judge that the plaintiff is receiving compensation  whether the information comes from the judge's own knowledge or is merely reiterative by him of a witness's testimony  is upon a material issue in the case.
The order granting the new trial is affirmed.