Case Name: In the Matter of the Compensation of Ernest F. Erck, Claimant. ERCK, Petitioner, v. BROWN OLDSMOBILE et al, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1989-02-22
Citations: 95 Or. App. 400
Docket Number: WCB 86-05134; CA A47689
Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of Ernest F. Erck, Claimant. ERCK, Petitioner, v. BROWN OLDSMOBILE et al, Respondents.
Judges: Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Graber and Riggs, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 95
Pages: 400–402

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted December 12, 1988,
affirmed February 22,
reconsideration denied July 7, petition for review allowed August 1,1989 (308 Or 197)
In the Matter of the Compensation of Ernest F. Erck, Claimant. ERCK, Petitioner, v. BROWN OLDSMOBILE et al, Respondents.
(WCB 86-05134; CA A47689)
768 P2d 946
Robert K. Udziela, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Nelson R. Hall, Donald R. Wilson and Pozzi, Wilson, Atchison, O’Leary & Conboy, Portland.
Randy G. Rice, Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Beers, Zimmerman & Rice, Portland.
Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Graber and Riggs, Judges.
PER CURIAM
Riggs, J., dissenting.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In this workers' compensation case, we review for substantial evidence. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co., 90 Or App 200, 752 P2d 312 (1988). The Board's order is sufficient for review, there is substantial evidence to support its findings, and its reasoning connects those findings to the conclusion. Therefore, we hold that the Board did not err in reversing the referee's award of permanent total disability.
Affirmed.