656.382
Penalties and attorney fees payable by insurer or employer in processing claim. (1) If an insurer or self-insured
employer refuses to pay compensation, costs or attorney fees due under an order
of an Administrative Law Judge, the board or the court, or otherwise
unreasonably resists the payment of compensation, costs or attorney fees,
except as provided in ORS 656.385, the employer or insurer shall pay to the
attorney of the claimant a reasonable attorney fee as provided in subsection
(2) of this section. To the extent an employer has caused the insurer to be
charged such fees, such employer may be charged with those fees.
(2) If a request
for hearing, request for review, appeal or cross-appeal to the Court of Appeals
or petition for review to the Supreme Court is initiated by an employer or
insurer, and the Administrative Law Judge, board or court finds that all or
part of the compensation awarded to a claimant should not be disallowed or
reduced, or, through the assistance of an attorney, that an order rescinding a
notice of closure should not be reversed or all or part of the compensation
awarded by a reconsideration order issued under ORS 656.268 should not be
reduced or disallowed, the employer or insurer shall be required to pay to the
attorney of the claimant a reasonable attorney fee in an amount set by the
Administrative Law Judge, board or court for legal representation by an
attorney for the claimant at and prior to the hearing, review on appeal or
cross-appeal.
(3) If an
employer or insurer raises attorney fees, penalties or costs as a separate
issue in a request for hearing, request for review, appeal or cross-appeal to
the Court of Appeals or petition for review to the Supreme Court initiated by
the employer or insurer under this section, and the Administrative Law Judge,
board or court finds that the attorney fees, penalties or costs awarded to the
claimant should not be disallowed or reduced, the Administrative Law Judge,
board or court shall award reasonable additional attorney fees to the attorney
for the claimant for efforts in defending the fee, penalty or costs.
(4) If an
employer or insurer initiates an appeal to the board or Court of Appeals and
the matter is briefed, but the employer or insurer withdraws the appeal prior
to a decision by the board or court, resulting in the claimant’s prevailing in
the matter, the claimant’s attorney is entitled to a reasonable attorney fee
for efforts in briefing the matter to the board or court.
(5) If upon
reaching a decision on a request for hearing initiated by an employer it is
found by the Administrative Law Judge that the employer initiated the hearing
for the purpose of delay or other vexatious reason or without reasonable
ground, the Administrative Law Judge may order the employer to pay to the
claimant such penalty not exceeding $750 and not less than $100 as may be
reasonable in the circumstances. [1965 c.285 §42; 1981 c.854 §24; 1983 c.568 §1;
1987 c.884 §34; 1990 c.2 §28; 1995 c.332 §42b; 2009 c.526 §3; 2015 c.521 §5]
Notes of Decisions
SAIF Corp. v. DeLeon (2012)
or · cites it 36×
“The original version of ORS 656.382, by contrast, was not adopted until 1965.”
Shoulders v. SAIF Corp. (1986)
or · cites it 21×
“In reaching this conclusion, the court held that ORS 656.382 was not applicable and relied instead on ORS 656.”
Tri-Met, Inc. v. Wolfe (2004)
orctapp · cites it 31×
“Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Board (board), contending that the board erred in awarding claimant insurer-paid attorney fees pursuant to ORS 656.382(1). We affirm. The facts are undisputed.”
Deaton v. Hunt-Elder (1996)
orctapp · cites it 42×
“In addition to relying on cases that are inapposite, the dissent maintains that a stipulated settlement order is not the equivalent of a "finding" for purposes of ORS 656.382, notwithstanding the requirement that the ALJ approve the settlement.”
Saif Corp. v. Allen (1994)
or · cites it 10×
“That statute provides: "In all other cases attorney fees shall continue to be paid from the claimant's award of compensation except as otherwise provided in ORS 656.382." We disagree. ORS 656.386(2) would still control the payment of attorney fees in cases in which the referee…”
SAIF Corp. v. Traner (2015)
orctapp · cites it 25×
“Treating the latter statute as if it were the only applicable authorization for fees, SAIF objected that ORS 656.382 permits an attorney fee award only when a claimant wins or defends compensation, something that did not happen in this case.”
Cayton v. Safelite Glass Corp. (2013)
orctapp · cites it 15×
“388 allows him to request attorney fees for services before every prior forum, as authorized by ORS 656.382.” We conditioned the actual award of attorney fees for services on review on the ultimate outcome of the case on remand.”
Duffour v. Portland Community College (2017)
orctapp · cites it 13×
“268(5)(d) 2 and attorney fees under ORS 656.382(1) 3 because of the premature claim closure, and on entitlement to a penalty and fees under ORS 656.”
Forney v. Western States Plywood (1984)
or · cites it 10×
“ORS 656.382 provides: *631 “(1) If an insurer or self-insured employer refuses to pay compensation due under an order of a referee, board or court, or otherwise unreasonably resists the payment of compensation, the employer or insurer shall pay to the claimant or the attorney of…”
Greenslitt v. City of Lake Oswego (1988)
or · cites it 9×
“This case involves three related statutes: ORS 656.382 (penalties and attorney fees payable by insurer in processing claim), ORS 656.”
Matter of Compensation of Bracke (1983)
or · cites it 11×
“The issue is whether under ORS 656.382(2) a workers’ 1 compensation claimant is entitled to an award of attorney fees in this court where the employer and its insurer petitioned this court for review of a Court of Appeals’ decision and the compensation to be awarded claimant…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.382(1) — 93 cases
Tri-Met, Inc. v. Wolfe (2004)
orctapp
“Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Board (board), contending that the board erred in awarding claimant insurer-paid attorney fees pursuant to ORS 656.382(1). We affirm. The facts are undisputed.”
Duffour v. Portland Community College (2017)
orctapp
“268(5)(d) 2 and attorney fees under ORS 656.382(1) 3 because of the premature claim closure, and on entitlement to a penalty and fees under ORS 656.”
Cayton v. Safelite Glass Corp. (2013)
orctapp
“388 allows him to request attorney fees for services before every prior forum, as authorized by ORS 656.382.” We conditioned the actual award of attorney fees for services on review on the ultimate outcome of the case on remand.”
Saif Corp. v. Allen (1994)
or
“That statute provides: "In all other cases attorney fees shall continue to be paid from the claimant's award of compensation except as otherwise provided in ORS 656.382." We disagree. ORS 656.386(2) would still control the payment of attorney fees in cases in which the referee…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.382(2) — 114 cases
SAIF Corp. v. DeLeon (2012)
or
“The original version of ORS 656.382, by contrast, was not adopted until 1965.”
Shoulders v. SAIF Corp. (1986)
or
“In reaching this conclusion, the court held that ORS 656.382 was not applicable and relied instead on ORS 656.”
Deaton v. Hunt-Elder (1996)
orctapp
“In addition to relying on cases that are inapposite, the dissent maintains that a stipulated settlement order is not the equivalent of a "finding" for purposes of ORS 656.382, notwithstanding the requirement that the ALJ approve the settlement.”
Matter of Compensation of Bracke (1983)
or
“The issue is whether under ORS 656.382(2) a workers’ 1 compensation claimant is entitled to an award of attorney fees in this court where the employer and its insurer petitioned this court for review of a Court of Appeals’ decision and the compensation to be awarded claimant…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.382(3) — 7 cases
Greenslitt v. City of Lake Oswego (1988)
or
“This case involves three related statutes: ORS 656.382 (penalties and attorney fees payable by insurer in processing claim), ORS 656.”
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.