Schrock v. SAIF Corp., 814 P.2d 562 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
Schrock v. SAIF Corp., 814 P.2d 562 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of the Compensation of Carla J. Schrock, Carla J. SCHROCK
v.
SAIF CORPORATION and Rock Of Ages Home
WCB 89-09148; CA A67012.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Aug 21, 1991.
Published opinion
814 P.2d 562
1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 1224
1991 WL 160669
Charles D. Maier and Gatti, Gatti, Maier & Associates, Salem, filed the brief for petitioner., Thomas E. Ewing, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Jerome Lidz, Assistant Attorney General, Salem.
Edmonds, Riggs, Warren.
Published
PER CURIAM

The Workers’ Compensation Board did not err in upholding employer’s denial of chiropractic treatment.

Employer rescinded its denial of ultrasound treatment at the hearing, and claimant sought attorney fees under ORS 656.386. After the Board’s decision denying attorney fees, the legislature amended ORS 656.386 to allow for attorney fees in this type of situation. That amendment applies retroactively to cases in which the order was not final on or before the effective date of the act. SB 540, § 3 (1991).

Reversed in part and remanded for award of attorney fees; otherwise affirmed.