656.126
Coverage while temporarily in or out of state; judicial notice of other state’s
laws; agreements between states relating to conflicts of jurisdiction;
limitation on compensation for claims in this state and other jurisdictions. (1) If a worker employed in this
state and subject to this chapter temporarily leaves the state incidental to
that employment and receives an accidental injury arising out of and in the
course of employment, the worker, or beneficiaries of the worker if the injury
results in death, is entitled to the benefits of this chapter as though the
worker were injured within this state.
(2) Any worker
from another state and the employer of the worker in that other state are
exempted from the provisions of this chapter while that worker is temporarily
within this state doing work for the employer:
(a) If that
employer has furnished workers’ compensation insurance coverage under the
workers’ compensation insurance or similar laws of a state other than Oregon so
as to cover that worker’s employment while in this state;
(b) If the
extraterritorial provisions of this chapter are recognized in that other state;
and
(c) If employers
and workers who are covered in this state are likewise exempted from the
application of the workers’ compensation insurance or similar laws of the other
state.
The benefits under the
workers’ compensation insurance Act or similar laws of the other state, or
other remedies under a like Act or laws, are the exclusive remedy against the
employer for any injury, whether resulting in death or not, received by the
worker while working for that employer in this state.
(3) A certificate
from the duly authorized officer of the Department of Consumer and Business
Services or similar department of another state certifying that the employer of
the other state is insured therein and has provided extraterritorial coverage
insuring workers while working within this state is prima facie evidence that
the employer carries that workers’ compensation insurance.
(4) Whenever in
any appeal or other litigation the construction of the laws of another
jurisdiction is required, the courts shall take judicial notice thereof.
(5) The Director
of the Department of Consumer and Business Services shall have authority to
enter into agreements with the workers’ compensation agencies of other states
relating to conflicts of jurisdiction where the contract of employment is in
one state and the injuries are received in the other state, or where there is a
dispute as to the boundaries or jurisdiction of the states and when such
agreements have been executed and made public by the respective state agencies,
the rights of workers hired in such other state and injured while temporarily
in Oregon, or hired in Oregon and injured while temporarily in another state,
or where the jurisdiction is otherwise uncertain, shall be determined pursuant
to such agreements and confined to the jurisdiction provided in such
agreements.
(6) When a worker
has a claim under the workers’ compensation law of another state, territory,
province or foreign nation for the same injury or occupational disease as the
claim filed in Oregon, the total amount of compensation paid or awarded under
such other workers’ compensation law shall be credited against the compensation
due under Oregon workers’ compensation law. The worker shall be entitled to the
full amount of compensation due under Oregon law. If Oregon compensation is
more than the compensation under another law, or compensation paid the worker
under another law is recovered from the worker, the insurer shall pay any
unpaid compensation to the worker up to the amount required by the claim under
Oregon law. [Amended by 1955 c.723 §1; 1957 c.474 §1; 1977 c.804 §4; 1989 c.684
§1; 1995 c.332 §10; 1997 c.234 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Brown v. SAIF Corp. (2017)
or
“005(7)(a) (defining “compensable injury” to mean “accidental injury”); ORS 656.126(1) (referring to a worker receiving an “accidental injury” that arises out of and in the course of employment); ORS 656.”
Brown v. SAIF (2017)
or
“005(7)(a) (defining “compensable injury” to mean “accidental injury”); ORS 656.126(1) (referring to a worker receiving an “acciden- tal injury” that arises out of and in the course of employ- ment); ORS 656.”
Medi-Tech International Corp. v. Kwiecinski (2016)
orctapp · cites it 5×
“Specifically, under ORS 656.126(1), workers injured out of state are covered by the Act “if Oregon is the place of their permanent employment and if their presence out of state is incidental to that employment.”
Nelson v. SAIF Corp. (2007)
orctapp · cites it 26×
“]” Nevertheless, claimant insists that he is entitled to coverage because, in his view, the Act requires Oregon employers to provide coverage for all of their employees, regardless of the location of their work, and because “ORS 656.126 has limited, rather than unlimited,…”
Reynolds v. Hydro Tech Inc. (2002)
orctapp
“, ORS 656.126(6) (relating to *492 amount of compensation paid or awarded by other states); ORS 656.”
Carothers v. Robert Westlund Construction (1997)
orctapp · cites it 12×
“Claimant requested a hearing. “The [administrative law judge (AU)] determined that, if the ‘permanent employment relation’ test were applied, claimant would be considered an Oregon employee temporarily absent from the state when injured.”
Quinton v. LT & L LOGGING, INC. (1997)
orctapp
“Whether workers injured out of state are entitled to benefits under Oregon’s workers’ compensation system is governed by ORS 656.126(1), which provides, in part: “If a worker employed in this state and subject to this chapter temporarily leaves the state incidental to that…”
Saif Corp. v. Moe (1996)
orctapp · cites it 4×
“126, which provides, in part: “(1) If a worker employed in this state and subject to this chapter temporarily leaves the state incidental to that employment and receives an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment, the worker, or beneficiaries of the…”
SAIF Corp. v. Moe (1996)
orctapp · cites it 4×
“126, which provides, in part: "(1) If a worker employed in this state and subject to this chapter temporarily leaves the state incidental to that employment and receives an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment, the worker, or beneficiaries of the…”
Volk v. America West Airlines (1995)
orctapp
““(2) The amendments to ORS 656.126, 656.204 and 656.265 by sections 10, 13 and 29 of this Act and the amendments to ORS 656.”
Berkey v. Department of Insurance & Finance (1994)
orctapp · cites it 3×
“ORS 183.482(7). A subject worker employed in Oregon who temporarily leaves Oregon incidental to that employment and is injured on the job is entitled to the same benefits as though the worker had been injured in Oregon.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(1) — 21 cases
Brown v. SAIF Corp. (2017)
or
“005(7)(a) (defining “compensable injury” to mean “accidental injury”); ORS 656.126(1) (referring to a worker receiving an “accidental injury” that arises out of and in the course of employment); ORS 656.”
Nelson v. SAIF Corp. (2007)
orctapp
“]” Nevertheless, claimant insists that he is entitled to coverage because, in his view, the Act requires Oregon employers to provide coverage for all of their employees, regardless of the location of their work, and because “ORS 656.126 has limited, rather than unlimited,…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(2) — 7 cases
Nelson v. SAIF Corp. (2007)
orctapp
“]” Nevertheless, claimant insists that he is entitled to coverage because, in his view, the Act requires Oregon employers to provide coverage for all of their employees, regardless of the location of their work, and because “ORS 656.126 has limited, rather than unlimited,…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(2)(a) — 2 cases
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(4) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(5) — 3 cases
Carothers v. Robert Westlund Construction (1997)
orctapp
“Claimant requested a hearing. “The [administrative law judge (AU)] determined that, if the ‘permanent employment relation’ test were applied, claimant would be considered an Oregon employee temporarily absent from the state when injured.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(6) — 2 cases
Carothers v. Robert Westlund Construction (1997)
orctapp
“Claimant requested a hearing. “The [administrative law judge (AU)] determined that, if the ‘permanent employment relation’ test were applied, claimant would be considered an Oregon employee temporarily absent from the state when injured.”
Reynolds v. Hydro Tech Inc. (2002)
orctapp
“, ORS 656.126(6) (relating to *492 amount of compensation paid or awarded by other states); ORS 656.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.126(7) — 1 case
Carothers v. Robert Westlund Construction (1997)
orctapp
“Claimant requested a hearing. “The [administrative law judge (AU)] determined that, if the ‘permanent employment relation’ test were applied, claimant would be considered an Oregon employee temporarily absent from the state when injured.”
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.