Case Name: In the Matter of the Compensation of Vida Hicks, Claimant. HICKS, Petitioner, v. FRED MEYER, INC. et al, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1982-06-23
Citations: 58 Or. App. 18
Docket Number: No. 79-00920, CA A21996
Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of Vida Hicks, Claimant. HICKS, Petitioner, v. FRED MEYER, INC. et al, Respondents.
Judges: Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Thornton and Van Hoomissen, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 58
Pages: 18–20

Head Matter:
On respondents’ reconsideration filed May 26, reconsideration granted; former opinion filed April 26 (57 Or App 68, 643 P2d 1311)
adhered to as modified June 23, 1982
In the Matter of the Compensation of Vida Hicks, Claimant. HICKS, Petitioner, v. FRED MEYER, INC. et al, Respondents.
(No. 79-00920, CA A21996)
643 P2d 1311
Ronald W. Atwood, Dennis R. VavRosky, and Rankin, McMurry, VavRosky & Doherty, Portland, for petition.
Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Thornton and Van Hoomissen, Judges.
RICHARDSON, P. J.

Opinion:
RICHARDSON, P. J.
Employer and its compensation insurance carrier petitioned for reconsideration of our decision. They do not contend the result is wrong but point out that we misstated the factual basis of the decision in Wilson v. SAIF, 48 Or App 993, 618 P2d 473 (1980), in discussing that case. They are correct. The opinion presently reads in part:
"In Wilson, the carrier acted unilaterally by deducting the amount of overpayment from the compensation awarded by the determination order. " 57 Or App at 70.
The sentence is modified to read as follows:
"In Wilson, the carrier acted unilaterally by deducting the amount of overpayment from the compensation awarded by the referee after a hearing. "
The petition for reconsideration is granted, and the opinion, as modified, is adhered to.