Case Name: In the Matter of the Compensation of Dennis Kemple, Claimant. KEMPLE, Petitioner, v. MYERS DRUM CO., Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1982-07-22
Citations: 57 Or. App. 733
Docket Number: WCB No. 78-07534, CA A22253
Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of Dennis Kemple, Claimant. KEMPLE, Petitioner, v. MYERS DRUM CO., Respondent.
Judges: Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Joseph, Chief Judge, and Young, Judge.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 57
Pages: 733–734

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted January 26,
reversed and remanded June 9, reconsideration denied July 22,
petition for review denied September 21, 1982 (293 Or 521)
In the Matter of the Compensation of Dennis Kemple, Claimant. KEMPLE, Petitioner, v. MYERS DRUM CO., Respondent.
(WCB No. 78-07534, CA A22253)
646 P2d 34
Noreen K. Saltveit, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the brief was Merten & Saltveit, P. C., Portland.
Emil R. Berg, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Wolf, Grifith, Bittner, Abbott & Roberts, Portland.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Joseph, Chief Judge, and Young, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Joseph, C. J., vice Roberts, J.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
The issue in this workers' compensation case is whether a meniscectomy (knee surgery) and its sequela, including intercranial hemorrhaging, were causally related to claimant's preexisting compensable knee injury. The question presented is solely factual. We have concluded, on the basis of our de novo review, that claimant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the original compensable injury was a material contributing cause of the second knee surgery, and that, the surgery was not the result of an independent, intervening accident. We are further persuaded that the evidence established that the intercranial hemorrhaging was a consequence of the second surgery and is compensable. There is nothing to be gained by a lengthy recitation of the facts. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in Hoag v. Duraflake, 37 Or App 103, 585 P2d 1149, rev den 284 Or 521 (1978), we will not publish an extended opinion.
The Workers' Compensation Board's order on review affirming the referee, and the carrier's denial of January 30, 1979, is reversed and the claim is remanded for acceptance.