Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.287

Use of vocational reports in determining loss of earning capacity at hearing; rules

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

      656.287 Use of vocational reports in determining loss of earning capacity at hearing; rules. (1) Where there is an issue regarding loss of earning capacity, reports from vocational consultants employed by governmental agencies, insurers or self-insured employers, or from private vocational consultants, regarding job opportunities, the fitness of claimant to perform certain jobs, wage levels, or other information relating to claimant’s employability shall be admitted into evidence at compensation hearings, provided such information is submitted to claimant 10 days prior to hearing and that upon demand from the adverse party the person preparing such report shall be made available for testimony and cross-examination.

      (2) The Workers’ Compensation Board shall establish rules to govern the admissibility of reports from vocational experts, including guidelines to establish the competency of vocational experts. [1973 c.581 §§1,2; 1985 c.600 §10]

 

      656.288 [Amended by 1957 c.288 §1; repealed by 1965 c.285 §95]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2001 · leading case: Cutright v. Weyerhaeuser Co.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cutright v. Weyerhaeuser Co. (1985) or · cites it 6× “ORS 656.287(1) provides: "Where there is an issue regarding loss of earning capacity, reports from vocational consultants in governmental agencies or private vocational consultants regarding job opportunities, the fitness of claimant to perform certain jobs, wage levels, or…”
Koskela v. Willamette Industries, Inc. (1999) orctapp · cites it 6× “Additionally, employer observes that, at the hearing before the ALJ, claimant could have cross-examined the author of any written vocational report, pursuant to ORS 656.287(1), as long as that report was presented at reconsideration.”
Koskela v. Willamette Industries, Inc. (2000) or · cites it 3× “*378 In McClearen , the Court of Appeals had held that, in cases involving issues of loss of earning capacity, vocational evidence may be admitted at hearing under ORS 656.287(1), so long as the insurer or self-insured employer had submitted the reports to the worker ten days…”
Rogue Valley Medical Center v. McClearen (1998) orctapp · cites it 8× “Looking to context, employer urges that the statute conflicts with ORS 656.287(1), which provides: “Where there is an issue regarding loss of earning capacity, reports from vocational consultants * * * regarding job opportunities, the fitness of claimant to perform certain jobs,…”
Veselik v. SAIF Corp. (2001) orctapp “45 1 and that the “no new evidence in reconsideration hearings” rule of ORS 656.287(7) was not applied to petitioner’s claim so as to prevent her from offering additional evidence at the hearing before the ALJ.”
Atkins v. Allied Systems, Ltd. (2001) orctapp “For instance, when ORS 656.287 is read with OAR 436-035-0007(14), impairment must be established by objective medical evidence by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Peter Kiewit & Sons v. Leigh (1992) orctapp · cites it 2× “Employer argues, alternatively, that the report is not admissible under ORS 656.287(1), because claimant did not receive it 10 days before the hearing.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.287(1) — 5 cases
Cutright v. Weyerhaeuser Co. (1985) or “ORS 656.287(1) provides: "Where there is an issue regarding loss of earning capacity, reports from vocational consultants in governmental agencies or private vocational consultants regarding job opportunities, the fitness of claimant to perform certain jobs, wage levels, or…”
Koskela v. Willamette Industries, Inc. (1999) orctapp “Additionally, employer observes that, at the hearing before the ALJ, claimant could have cross-examined the author of any written vocational report, pursuant to ORS 656.287(1), as long as that report was presented at reconsideration.”
Koskela v. Willamette Industries, Inc. (2000) or “*378 In McClearen , the Court of Appeals had held that, in cases involving issues of loss of earning capacity, vocational evidence may be admitted at hearing under ORS 656.287(1), so long as the insurer or self-insured employer had submitted the reports to the worker ten days…”
Rogue Valley Medical Center v. McClearen (1998) orctapp “Looking to context, employer urges that the statute conflicts with ORS 656.287(1), which provides: “Where there is an issue regarding loss of earning capacity, reports from vocational consultants * * * regarding job opportunities, the fitness of claimant to perform certain jobs,…”
Peter Kiewit & Sons v. Leigh (1992) orctapp “Employer argues, alternatively, that the report is not admissible under ORS 656.287(1), because claimant did not receive it 10 days before the hearing.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.287(7) — 1 case
Veselik v. SAIF Corp. (2001) orctapp “45 1 and that the “no new evidence in reconsideration hearings” rule of ORS 656.287(7) was not applied to petitioner’s claim so as to prevent her from offering additional evidence at the hearing before the ALJ.”
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.