Case Name: LUMBERMEN'S MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al, Appellants, v. AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1974-09-23
Citations: 18 Or. App. 665
Docket Number: No. 399-857
Parties: LUMBERMEN’S MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al, Appellants, v. AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, Respondent.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Foley and Tanzer, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 18
Pages: 665–666

Head Matter:
Argued August 20,
affirmed September 23, 1974
LUMBERMEN’S MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al, Appellants, v. AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, Respondent.
(No. 399-857)
526 P2d 589
Richard Wm. Davis, Portland, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief was Lindsay, Nahstoll, Hart, Duncan, Dafoe & Krause, Portland.
Ridgway K. Foley, Jr., Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Souther, Spaulding, Kinsey, Williamson & Schwabe, Robert E. Joseph, Jr., and Michael D. Hoffman, Portland.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Foley and Tanzer, Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether claimant, in a fall on June 14, 1972, suffered a new injury or an aggravation of a previous injury.
If the injury is an aggravation then defendant Aetna Casualty & Surety Company is responsible. If it is a new injury plaintiff Lumbermen's Mutual Insurance Company is responsible.
The hearing officer, initially, and the Workmen's Compensation Board and the circuit court, each, in its de novo review, found claimant's June 14, 1972, fall a new injury. The hearing officer's determination was based in part on claimant's testimony, which he found credible. We give weight to the hearing officer's finding on issues involving credibility. Hannan v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 4 Or App 178, 471 P2d 831, 476 P2d 931 (1970), Sup Ct review denied (1971); Giese v. Safeway Stores, 10 Or App 452, 457, 499 P2d 1364, 501 P2d 982, Sup Ct review denied (1972). No useful purpose would be served in again setting forth the facts.
We have reviewed the record and agree with the determination of the hearing officer, the Board and the circuit court.
Affirmed.