Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.226

Cohabitants entitled to compensation

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

      656.226 Cohabitants entitled to compensation. If, prior to and including the date of an accidental injury received by one or the other as a subject worker, two unmarried individuals have cohabited together such that the relationship would be subject to the provisions of ORS 107.105 to 107.136 and 107.700 to 107.735, the surviving cohabitant is entitled to compensation under this chapter the same as if the individuals had been legally married. [Amended by 1983 c.816 §4; 2015 c.629 §55; 2022 c.6 §2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1972–2020 · leading case: Hewitt v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hewitt v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. (1982) or · cites it 74× “We are asked in this case to determine the constitutionality of ORS 656.226, a portion of the Oregon workers' compensation laws which provides: "In case an unmarried man and an unmarried woman have cohabited in this state as husband and wife for over one year prior to the date…”
Ore-Ida Foods, Inc. v. Indian Head Cattle Co. (1981) or · cites it 6× “Ore-Ida [1] was required to pay survivor's benefits to Donna Lee Burzota under Oregon Workers' Compensation Law, ORS 656.226. Ore-Ida sued defendant to recover the amounts paid to Donna Lee Burzota.”
Amos v. SAIF Corp. (1985) orctapp · cites it 8× “” Mother also claimed death benefits, asserting that she qualified under ORS 656.226: “In case an unmarried man and an unmarried woman cohabited in this state as husband and wife for over one year prior to the date of an accidental injury received by one or the other as a…”
Brown v. SAIF Corp. (2017) or “204 (referring to death resulting from “accidental injury”); ORS 656.226 (the date of the “accidental injury”); ORS 656.”
Cato v. Alcoa-Reynolds Metals Co. (2007) orctapp · cites it 5× “In particular, ORS 656.226 provides: “In case an unmarried man and an unmarried woman have cohabited in this state as husband and wife for over one year prior to the date of an accidental injury received by one or the other as a subject worker, and children are living as a…”
Kempf v. State Accident Insurance Fund (1978) orctapp · cites it 25× “According to claimant, "the only issue” in this workers’ compensation case is the constitutionality of ORS 656.226. However, in view of the dissent, we consider the additional issue of the interpretation of ORS 656.”
Thomas v. State Accident Insurance Fund (1972) orctapp · cites it 7× “The sole question is whether the circuit court erred in sustaining the administrative determination of the Workmen’s Compensation Board that plaintiff was not the widow of Donald Thomas within the meaning of ORS 656.226. This statute reads as follows: “In case an unmarried man…”
Bowlin v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. (1986) orctapp · cites it 6× “Claimant filed a claim for death benefits under ORS 656.226, asserting that she and decedent, a farm worker, had cohabited as husband and wife for at least one year before and were doing so at the time of the compensable accident.”
Cottrell v. EBI Companies (1987) or · cites it 10× “The issue in this workers’ compensation case is whether claimant is entitled to survivor’s benefits under ORS 656.226, which provides: “In case an unmarried man and an unmarried woman have cohabited in this state as husband and wife for over one year prior to the date of an…”
SAIF v. Williams (2020) orctapp “” Williams I, 281 Or App at 548 ; see also ORS 656.226(1) (requiring the claimant to prove the compensability of an injury or occupational disease); De Los-Santos v.”
Hewitt v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. (1981) orctapp · cites it 11× “Petitioner appeals the Workers’ Compensation Board’s Order which denied his claim for benefits pursuant to ORS 656.226. 1 Petitioner and Marian Williams were unmarried cohabitants from 1974 until Marian Williams’ death on May 20, 1979, from a compensable industrial accident.”
Johnston v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (1978) orctapp · cites it 5× “The parties were never formally married, but it is claimed that under the laws of Colorado a valid common-law marriage existed. Although Oregon does not recognize "common-law marriages,” under certain circumstances a person who had been cohabiting with a deceased worker is…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.226(1) — 1 case
SAIF v. Williams (2020) orctapp “” Williams I, 281 Or App at 548 ; see also ORS 656.226(1) (requiring the claimant to prove the compensability of an injury or occupational disease); De Los-Santos v.”
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.