Court Opinion

ID: 9624766
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 07:17:12.088776+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:54.461786
License: Public Domain

PETERSON, C. J.,
concurring.
I concur in the result.
I read the referee’s opinion (quoting from his decision) to find that, because of “a rupture[d] disc” and “[work] restrictions that have been imposed to prevent reinjury,” the claimant “is precluded from returning to work in the wood products industry.” I do not share the majority’s uncertainty concerning the quoted language.
I nonetheless would affirm the Court of Appeals because, as this court has stated, “the [referee’s] determination was [not] essential to the judgment.” State Farm Fire and Casualty v. Reuter, 299 Or 155, 158, 700 P2d 236 (1985). There is no statute or rule imposing the requirement that a worker be “precluded” from returning to his or her job in order to obtain an award of permanent partial disability. As the majority points out, 307 Or at 637, “[t]o make a claimant appeal an otherwise satisfactory award only to eliminate the preclusive effect of unrequested and nonessential findings would not further the procedural objectives of preclusion * *