Court Opinion

ID: 9630596
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:15:11.919028+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:29.653550
License: Public Domain

VAN HOOMISSEN,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent because in my view a legitimate claim is being denied here as a result of a misunderstanding between the attorneys. In a case such as this, where the Board has reversed the referee’s order which *769granted claimant an unscheduled disability award for her right shoulder condition, all doubts should be resolved in favor of a full and complete resolution of the claim on its merits. The workers’ compensation law is remedial in character and should be liberally construed to promote the beneficial results intended by the legislature. Newell v. Taylor et al, 212 Or 522, 321 P2d 294 (1958). Procedural technicalities should yield to the public policy implicit in the law. I would remand to the referee for consideration of Dr. Crook’s report. ORS 656.298(6).