Case Name: In the Matter of the Compensation of Judy A. Britton, Claimant. BRITTON, Petitioner, v. SQUIRES ELECTRONICS et al, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1986-10-08
Citations: 81 Or. App. 512
Docket Number: WCB Nos. 84-06935 and 84-04723; CA A37634
Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of Judy A. Britton, Claimant. BRITTON, Petitioner, v. SQUIRES ELECTRONICS et al, Respondents.
Judges: Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 81
Pages: 512–513

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted September 15,
affirmed October 8, 1986
In the Matter of the Compensation of Judy A. Britton, Claimant. BRITTON, Petitioner, v. SQUIRES ELECTRONICS et al, Respondents.
(WCB Nos. 84-06935 and 84-04723; CA A37634)
725 P2d 1298
James L. Edmunson, Eugene, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Malagon & Moore, Eugene.
Nancy J. Meserow, Beaverton, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents.
Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In this workers' compensation case, claimant asserts that her work for employer caused the condition that necessitated her back surgery in 1983. The referee and the Board both found against her on that issue, and we agree. The more difficult aspect of the case is her claim that she has suffered post-surgical physical deterioration because of her return to work and that it is compensable.
Although the record suggests that her physician allowed her to return to work too early and that that impeded her recovery, the record persuades us on de novo review that the claimed deterioration is only the natural course of both her degenerative spinal disease, which is not work-related, and the post-surgical recovery process.
Affirmed.