Responsibility for payment of claims
- effect of new injury
- denial of responsibility
- procedure for joining employers and insurers
- attorney fees
- limitation on filing claims subject to settlement agreement
Source:
Section 656.308 — Responsibility for payment of claims; effect of new injury; denial of responsibility; procedure for joining employers and insurers; attorney fees; limitation on filing claims subject to settlement agreement, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors656.html.
Notes of Decisions
If second accidental injury described under ORS 656.005 is not major contributing cause of disability or need for treatment, employer during first compensable injury remains responsible. SAIF v. Drews, 318 Or 1, 860 P2d 254 (1993)
If second accidental injury described under ORS 656.005 is major contributing cause of disability or need for treatment, responsibility for combined condition shifts to employer during second injury. SAIF v. Drews, 318 Or 1, 860 P2d 254 (1993)
Last injurious exposure rule is not affected by this section where initial claim rather than accepted claim is in issue. Bennett v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 128 Or App 71, 875 P2d 1176 (1994); SAIF v. Yokum, 132 Or App 18, 887 P2d 380 (1994)
Within context of shifting employer responsibility, “compensable injury” refers to injury that resulted in accepted claim. SAIF v. Yokum, 132 Or App 18, 887 P2d 380 (1994)
Under version in effect prior to 1995 amendment, failure of claimant to file claim against other potentially liable insurer within 60 days did not bar claim as untimely. Motel 6 v. McMasters, 135 Or App 583, 899 P2d 1212 (1995); Norstadt v. Murphy Plywood, 148 Or App 484, 941 P2d 1030 (1997), modified 150 Or App 245, 945 P2d 654 (1997), Sup Ct review denied
Where initial employer is determined to be not responsible for subsequent injury, application of last injurious exposure rule to assess liability is permissible. Barrett Business Services v. Williams, 148 Or App 1, 939 P2d 50 (1997)
1995 amendments eliminating obligation to issue disclaimer and changing time limit for issuing denial are not retroactively applicable to claims filed before amendment date. Norstadt v. Murphy Plywood, 148 Or App 484, 941 P2d 1030 (1997), modified 150 Or App 245, 945 P2d 654 (1997), Sup Ct review denied
Under pre-1995 version of statute, employer obligation to disclaim responsibility is not dependent upon compensability of injury. Garibay v. Barrett Business Services, 148 Or App 496, 941 P2d 1036 (1997)
Maximum limit on attorney fees for finally prevailing against responsibility denial is limit on total fees awarded at all stages of case. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Gordineer, 150 Or App 136, 945 P2d 107 (1997)
Attorney fee limitation in responsibility denial cases is not applicable to attorney fees awarded under ORS 656.307. Dean Warren Plumbing v. Brenner, 150 Or App 422, 946 P2d 356 (1997)
Attorney fee limitation is applicable to responsibility portion of case regardless of whether responsibility is sole issue in case. Foster-Wheeler Constructors, Inc. v. Smith, 151 Or App 155, 947 P2d 1144 (1997)
Where claimant has compensable claim caused by conditions at single employer, most recent insurer is responsible unless insurer proves: 1) workplace conditions at time it insured employer could not have caused claimant’s disease; or 2) disease was caused solely by conditions at time coverage was under previous insurer. Roseburg Forest Products v. Long, 325 Or 305, 937 P2d 517 (1997)
Evidence that previous employment was major cause, but not sole cause, of injury does not shift responsibility for injury to previous employer. Safeco Insurance Co. v. Victoria, 154 Or App 574, 963 P2d 83 (1998), Sup Ct review denied
Where factual findings establish compensability under last injurious exposure rule, rule must be followed regardless of whether claimant has invoked it. Gosda v. J. B. Hunt Transportation, 155 Or App 120, 962 P2d 777 (1998)
Where employer accepts combined condition involving new injury and preexisting compensable injury, employer may deny combined condition under ORS 656.262 if new injury ceases to be major contributing cause, but will remain subject to shifted responsibility for preexisting injury. Barrett Business Services v. Morrow, 164 Or App 628, 993 P2d 179 (1999)
Where claimant has compensable claim caused by conditions at multiple employers, most recent employer is responsible unless employer proves: 1) workplace conditions at time it employed claimant could not have caused claimant’s disease; or 2) disease was caused solely by conditions at time coverage was under previous employer. Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. v. Kaleta, 173 Or App 82, 20 P3d 256 (2001)
Where employer responsible for initial occupational disease claim is not subject to Oregon law, treatment of claim filed against Oregon employer for worsening of disease is same as for claim against Oregon employer for initial injury. SAIF v. Henwood, 176 Or App 431, 31 P3d 1096 (2001), Sup Ct review denied
New compensable injury involves same condition as preexisting condition only if preexisting condition is within or part of new injury or is directly affected by new injury. Multifoods Specialty Distribution v. McAtee, 333 Or 629, 43 P3d 1101 (2002)
Up to date