Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.017 (2026)

Employer required to pay compensation and perform other duties; state not authorized to be direct responsibility employer

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

656.017 Employer required to pay compensation and perform other duties; state not authorized to be direct responsibility employer. (1) Every employer subject to this chapter shall maintain assurance with the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services that subject workers of the employer and their beneficiaries will receive compensation for compensable injuries as provided by this chapter and that the employer will perform all duties and pay other obligations required under this chapter, by qualifying:

(a) As a carrier-insured employer; or

(b) As a self-insured employer as provided by ORS 656.407.

(2) Notwithstanding ORS chapter 278, this state shall provide compensation insurance for its employees through the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation.

(3) Any employer required by the statutes of this state other than this chapter or by the rules, regulations, contracts or procedures of any agency of the federal government, this state or a political subdivision of this state to provide or agree to provide workers’ compensation coverage, either directly or through bond requirements, may provide such coverage by any method provided in this section. [1975 c.556 §21 (enacted in lieu of 656.016); 1977 c.659 §1; 1979 c.815 §1; 1981 c.854 §3; 1985 c.731 §30]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 122 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Muliro, 380 P.3d 270 (Or. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Muliro, 380 P.3d 270 (Or. 2016). · cites it 4× “Claimant employs two statutory provisions, ORS 656.017(1) and ORS 656.262(1), to argue that an employer’s knowledge of an injured worker’s secondary employment should be imputed to the employer’s insurer under ORS 656.”

Errand v. Cascade Steel Rolling Mills, Inc., 888 P.2d 544 (Or. 1995). · cites it 6× “018, which provides in part: "(1)(a) The liability of every employer who satisfies the duty required by ORS 656.017(1) is exclusive and in place of all other liability arising out of compensable injuries to the subject workers, the workers' beneficiaries and anyone otherwise…”

Blacknall v. Westwood Corp., 764 P.2d 544 (Or. 1988). · cites it 13× “020 states that damage actions may be brought “by an injured worker * * * against any employer who has failed to comply with ORS 656.017 * * ORS 656.017(1) requires subject employers to “maintain assurance * * * that subject workers of the employer * * * will receive…”

Olsen v. Deschutes Cnty., 127 P.3d 655 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “[13] Here, according to defendant, it is undisputed that defendant is a covered employer under the provisions of ORS 656.017(1), that each plaintiff qualifies as a "subject worker" under ORS 656.”

Fields v. Jantec, Inc., 857 P.2d 95 (Or. 1993). · cites it 6× “005(13) (defining an “employer” as a person who ‘ ‘contracts to pay a remuneration for and secures the right to direct and control the services of any person”); ORS 656.017 (establishing employers’ duties in regard to compliance with the Workers’ Compensation Law).”

Montgomery Elevator Co. v. Tuality Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 790 P.2d 1148 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 10× “ORS 656.017; ORS 656.018. [1] *1151 The majority creates a loophole that eviscerates the bargain.”

Juarez v. Windsor Rock Prods., Inc., 144 P.3d 211 (Or. 2006). · cites it 3× “018 provides, in part: “The liability of every employer who satisfies the duty required by ORS 656.017(1) is exclusive and in place of all other liability arising out of injuries, diseases, symptom complexes or similar conditions arising out of and in the course of employment…”

Roberts v. SAIF Corp., 136 P.3d 1105 (Or. 2006). · cites it 4× “" ORS 656.017(1). If an employer satisfies that obligation, then ORS 656.”

Young v. Mobil Oil Corp., 735 P.2d 654 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “018(1) provided: “ ‘Every employer who satisfies the duty required by subsection (1) of ORS 656.017 is relieved of all other liability for compensable injuries to his subject workmen, the workmen’s beneficiaries and anyone otherwise entitled to recover damages from the employer…”

Brown v. SAIF Corp., 391 P.3d 773 (Or. 2017). “” ORS 656.017(1). A “compensable injury” is a term of art, meaning, with certain limitations and exceptions: “an accidental injury, or accidental injury to prosthetic appliances, arising out of and in the course of employment requiring medical services or resulting in disability…”

Tri-State Constr., Inc. v. Columbia Cas. Co./CNA, 692 P.2d 899 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “" 2 Tri-State failed to comply with Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.017 and was thus a ''noncomplying employer" under former Or.”

Cortez v. Nacco Materials Handling Grp., Inc., 337 P.3d 111 (Or. 2014). · cites it 2× “018 (2011) provided, in part: “(l)(a) The liability of every employer who satisfies the duty required by ORS 656.017(1) is exclusive and in place of all other liability arising out of injuries, *** that are sustained by subject workers, the workers’ beneficiaries and anyone…”

Show all 122 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.017(1) — 83 cases

Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Muliro, 380 P.3d 270 (Or. 2016). “Claimant employs two statutory provisions, ORS 656.017(1) and ORS 656.262(1), to argue that an employer’s knowledge of an injured worker’s secondary employment should be imputed to the employer’s insurer under ORS 656.”

Errand v. Cascade Steel Rolling Mills, Inc., 888 P.2d 544 (Or. 1995). “018, which provides in part: "(1)(a) The liability of every employer who satisfies the duty required by ORS 656.017(1) is exclusive and in place of all other liability arising out of compensable injuries to the subject workers, the workers' beneficiaries and anyone otherwise…”

Olsen v. Deschutes Cnty., 127 P.3d 655 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “[13] Here, according to defendant, it is undisputed that defendant is a covered employer under the provisions of ORS 656.017(1), that each plaintiff qualifies as a "subject worker" under ORS 656.”

Juarez v. Windsor Rock Prods., Inc., 144 P.3d 211 (Or. 2006). “018 provides, in part: “The liability of every employer who satisfies the duty required by ORS 656.017(1) is exclusive and in place of all other liability arising out of injuries, diseases, symptom complexes or similar conditions arising out of and in the course of employment…”

Roberts v. SAIF Corp., 136 P.3d 1105 (Or. 2006). “" ORS 656.017(1). If an employer satisfies that obligation, then ORS 656.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.017(l)(a) — 1 case

FMC Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 698 P.2d 551 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.017(l)(b) — 1 case

FMC Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 698 P.2d 551 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.