Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419 (2026)

Workers’ compensation insurance contracts

✓ current as of May 2026

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

656.419 Workers’ compensation insurance contracts. (1) A workers’ compensation insurance policy issued by an insurer under this section shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume, without monetary limit, the liability of the employer, arising during the period the policy is in effect, for prompt payment of all compensation for compensable injuries that may become due under this chapter to subject workers and their beneficiaries.

(2)(a) The insurer issuing the workers’ compensation insurance policy shall file proof of coverage with the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services within 30 days after workers’ compensation coverage of the employer is effective. The filing shall be in the form and manner and shall include any information that the director may prescribe by rule.

(b) An insurer shall file the proof of coverage required under this section for each new or renewed policy issued by the insurer.

(3) Workers’ compensation coverage is effective when the application of the subject employer for coverage together with any required fees or premium are received and accepted by an authorized representative of an insurer or on the date specified in writing by the employer and the insurer.

(4) Coverage of an employer under a workers’ compensation insurance policy continues until:

(a) The expiration of the term of the policy;

(b) The coverage is canceled prior to the expiration date of the policy as provided by ORS 656.423 or 656.427;

(d) The employer becomes self-insured under ORS 656.430. [1975 c.556 §29; 1977 c.405 §7; 1981 c.854 §28; 1987 c.237 §1; 1995 c.93 §35; 1995 c.332 §46; 2003 c.170 §3; 2007 c.241 §1]

656.420 [Renumbered 656.758]

656.421 [1965 c.285 §76(4),(5),(6),(7); repealed by 1975 c.556 §54]

656.422 [Amended by 1959 c.450 §5; repealed by 1965 c.285 §95]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases, 1983–2013 · leading case: Blacknall v. Westwood Corp., 764 P.2d 544 (Or. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Blacknall v. Westwood Corp., 764 P.2d 544 (Or. 1988). · cites it 3× “ORS 656.419(1) requires that every “guaranty contract issued by an insurer shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume, without monetary limit, the liability of the employer * * * for prompt payment of: (a) All compensation for compensable injuries that may become due under…”

Oak Crest Care Ctr. v. Bond, 789 P.2d 6 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “We concluded that the second carrier was responsible for the claimant’s *19 condition, given its agreement to provide coverage as of March 28 and ORS 656.419(1). 3 Crawford contends that D Maintenance Company v.”

Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Zurich Am., 268 P.3d 671 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “740(3) does not expressly address whether the joined insurer is responsible for paying the claim if the alleged noncomplying employer establishes coverage, ORS 656.419(1) provides that workers’ compensation insurance policies “shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume,…”

SAIF Corp. v. Matt Jenkins Contracting, 306 P.3d 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “740(6)(b), reasoning that “]t]hat section allows an assessed attorney fee where a person who the director found to be a noncomplying employer *52 had a workers’ compensation insurance contract with an insurer that either failed to timely file the contract with the director…”

Mayfly Grp., Inc. v. Ruiz, 250 P.3d 360 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). ““(2) The director may assess a civil penalty against an employer who fails to respond to requests for information and fails to meet the requirements of OAR 436-050-0470. The matrix attached to these rules in Appendix ‘A’ will be used in assessing these penalties.”

D Maint. Co. v. Mischke, 733 P.2d 903 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “Furthermore, ORS 656.419(1) provides: “A guaranty contract issued by an insurer shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume, without monetary limit, the liability of the employer, arising during the period the guaranty contract is in effect * * (Emphasis supplied.”

Nw. Reforestation Contractors Ass'n v. Summitt Forests, Inc., 922 P.2d 1240 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “See ORS 656.419(1) (insurer’s guaranty contract is assumption of liability, without monetary limit, for all compensation that may become due to employer’s subject workers and their beneficiaries).”

US Bancorp v. Mulrooney, 107 P.3d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “See ORS 656.419(2)(a) (guaranty contract must contain the name of the employer).”

Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Zurich Am., 283 P.3d 357 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “740(6)(b) requires an insurance company to pay a noncomplying employer’s attorney fees if the insurer failed to fulfill its independent obligation under ORS 656.419 to timely file proof of coverage of the noncomplying employer’s subject employees.”

Employers Ins. of Wausau v. RM Hardy & Co., 963 P.2d 97 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “See ORS 656.419(1), (5). In order to cancel the contract properly, Wausau had to provide written notice of the cancellation to both Hardy and the Director of DCBS.”

SAIF Corp. v. Bowers, 168 P.3d 263 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “Regarding its employee’s testimony that coverage can (and did, on July 16) occur without a formal application, SAIF appears to offer two explanations: first, SAIF argues that, regardless of the employee’s testimony, SAIF does not have the authority to vary from the terms of ORS…”

Quadel Indus. v. Luckman, 770 P.2d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 6× “) ORS 656.419 provides, in part: “(2) A guaranty contract issued by a guaranty contract insurer shall be filed with the director by the insurer within 30 days after workers’ compensation *616 coverage of the employer is effective.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(1) — 7 cases

Blacknall v. Westwood Corp., 764 P.2d 544 (Or. 1988). “ORS 656.419(1) requires that every “guaranty contract issued by an insurer shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume, without monetary limit, the liability of the employer * * * for prompt payment of: (a) All compensation for compensable injuries that may become due under…”

Oak Crest Care Ctr. v. Bond, 789 P.2d 6 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “We concluded that the second carrier was responsible for the claimant’s *19 condition, given its agreement to provide coverage as of March 28 and ORS 656.419(1). 3 Crawford contends that D Maintenance Company v.”

Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs. v. Zurich Am., 268 P.3d 671 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “740(3) does not expressly address whether the joined insurer is responsible for paying the claim if the alleged noncomplying employer establishes coverage, ORS 656.419(1) provides that workers’ compensation insurance policies “shall provide that the insurer agrees to assume,…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(2) — 2 cases

In Re Comp. of Mccoy, 268 P.3d 671 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(2)(a) — 4 cases

US Bancorp v. Mulrooney, 107 P.3d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “See ORS 656.419(2)(a) (guaranty contract must contain the name of the employer).”

SAIF Corp. v. Matt Jenkins Contracting, 306 P.3d 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “740(6)(b), reasoning that “]t]hat section allows an assessed attorney fee where a person who the director found to be a noncomplying employer *52 had a workers’ compensation insurance contract with an insurer that either failed to timely file the contract with the director…”

In Re Comp. of Mccoy, 268 P.3d 671 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(2)(d) — 1 case

Quadel Indus. v. Luckman, 770 P.2d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “) ORS 656.419 provides, in part: “(2) A guaranty contract issued by a guaranty contract insurer shall be filed with the director by the insurer within 30 days after workers’ compensation *616 coverage of the employer is effective.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(3) — 2 cases

SAIF Corp. v. Bowers, 168 P.3d 263 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “Regarding its employee’s testimony that coverage can (and did, on July 16) occur without a formal application, SAIF appears to offer two explanations: first, SAIF argues that, regardless of the employee’s testimony, SAIF does not have the authority to vary from the terms of ORS…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(5) — 1 case

Employers Ins. of Wausau v. RM Hardy & Co., 963 P.2d 97 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “See ORS 656.419(1), (5). In order to cancel the contract properly, Wausau had to provide written notice of the cancellation to both Hardy and the Director of DCBS.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.419(l)(a) — 1 case

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.