Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726 (2026)

Duties and powers to carry out workers’ compensation and occupational safety laws; rules

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      656.726 Duties and powers to carry out workers’ compensation and occupational safety laws; rules. (1) The Workers’ Compensation Board in its name and the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services in the director’s name as director may sue and be sued, and each shall have a seal.

      (2) The board hereby is charged with reviewing appealed orders of Administrative Law Judges in controversies concerning a claim arising under this chapter, exercising own motion jurisdiction under this chapter and providing such policy advice as the director may request, and providing such other review functions as may be prescribed by law. To that end any of its members or assistants authorized thereto by the members shall have power to:

      (a) Hold sessions at any place within the state.

      (b) Administer oaths.

      (c) Issue and serve by the board’s representatives, or by any sheriff, subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of papers, contracts, books, accounts, documents and testimony before any hearing under ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423, 654.750 to 654.780 and this chapter.

      (d) Generally provide for the taking of testimony and for the recording of proceedings.

      (3) The board chairperson is hereby charged with the administration of and responsibility for the Hearings Division.

      (4) The director hereby is charged with duties of administration, regulation and enforcement of ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423, 654.750 to 654.780 and this chapter. To that end the director may:

      (a) Make and declare all rules and issue orders which are reasonably required in the performance of the director’s duties. Unless otherwise specified by law, all reports, claims or other documents shall be deemed timely provided to the director or board if mailed by regular mail or delivered within the time required by law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the director may adopt rules to allow for the electronic transmission and filing of reports, claims or other documents required to be filed under this chapter and to require the electronic transmission and filing of proof of coverage required under ORS 656.419, 656.423 and 656.427. Notwithstanding ORS 183.310 to 183.410, if a matter comes before the director that is not addressed by rule and the director finds that adoption of a rule to accommodate the matter would be inefficient, unreasonable or unnecessarily burdensome to the public, the director may resolve the matter by issuing an order, subject to review under ORS 656.704. Such order shall not have precedential effect as to any other situation.

      (b) Hold sessions at any place within the state.

      (c) Administer oaths.

      (d) Issue and serve by representatives of the director, or by any sheriff, subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of papers, contracts, books, accounts, documents and testimony in any inquiry, investigation, proceeding or rulemaking hearing conducted by the director or the director’s representatives. The director may require the attendance and testimony of employers, their officers and representatives in any inquiry under this chapter, and the production by employers of books, records, papers and documents without the payment or tender of witness fees on account of such attendance.

      (e) Generally provide for the taking of testimony and for the recording of such proceedings.

      (f) Provide standards for the evaluation of disabilities. The following provisions apply to the standards:

      (A) The criterion for evaluation of permanent impairment under ORS 656.214 is the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease. Permanent impairment is expressed as a percentage of the whole person. The impairment value may not exceed 100 percent of the whole person.

      (B) Impairment is established by a preponderance of medical evidence based upon objective findings.

      (C) The criterion for evaluation of work disability under ORS 656.214 is permanent impairment as modified by the factors of age, education and adaptability to perform a given job.

      (D) When, upon reconsideration of a notice of closure pursuant to ORS 656.268, it is found that the worker’s disability is not addressed by the standards adopted pursuant to this paragraph, notwithstanding ORS 656.268, the director shall, in the order on reconsideration, determine the extent of permanent disability that addresses the worker’s impairment.

      (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, only impairment benefits shall be awarded under ORS 656.214 if the worker has been released to regular work by the attending physician or nurse practitioner authorized to provide compensable medical services under ORS 656.245 or has returned to regular work at the job held at the time of injury.

      (g) Prescribe procedural rules for and conduct hearings, investigations and other proceedings pursuant to ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423, 654.750 to 654.780 and this chapter regarding all matters other than those specifically allocated to the board or the Hearings Division.

      (h) Participate fully in any proceeding before the Hearings Division, board or Court of Appeals in which the director determines that the proceeding involves a matter that affects or could affect the discharge of the director’s duties of administration, regulation and enforcement of ORS 654.001 to 654.295, 654.412 to 654.423, 654.750 to 654.780 and this chapter.

      (5)(a) The board may make and declare all rules which are reasonably required in the performance of its duties, including but not limited to rules of practice and procedure in connection with hearing and review proceedings and exercising its authority under ORS 656.278. The board shall adopt standards governing the format and timing of the evidence. The standards shall be uniformly followed by all Administrative Law Judges and practitioners. The rules may provide for informal prehearing conferences in order to expedite claim adjudication, amicably dispose of controversies, if possible, narrow issues and simplify the method of proof at hearings. The rules shall specify who may appear with parties at prehearing conferences and hearings.

      (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the board may adopt rules to allow for the electronic transmission of filings, reports, notices and other documents required to be filed under the board’s authority.

      (6) The director and the board chairperson may incur such expenses as they respectively determine are reasonably necessary to perform their authorized functions.

      (7) The director, the board chairperson and the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation shall have the right, not subject to review, to contract for the exchange of, or payment for, such services between them as will reduce the overall cost of administering this chapter.

      (8) The director shall have lien and enforcement powers regarding assessments to be paid by subject employers in the same manner and to the same extent as is provided for lien and enforcement of collection of premiums and assessments by the corporation under ORS 656.552 to 656.566.

      (9) The director shall have the same powers regarding inspection of books, records and payrolls of employers as are granted the corporation under ORS 656.758. The director may disclose information obtained from such inspections to the Director of the Department of Revenue to the extent the Director of the Department of Revenue requires such information to determine that a person complies with the revenue and tax laws of this state and to the Director of the Employment Department to the extent the Director of the Employment Department requires such information to determine that a person complies with ORS chapter 657.

      (10) The director shall collect hours-worked data information in addition to total payroll for workers engaged in various jobs in the construction industry classifications described in the job classification portion of the Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Manual and the Oregon Special Rules Section published by the National Council on Compensation Insurance. The information shall be collected in the form and format necessary for the National Council on Compensation Insurance to analyze premium equity. [Formerly 656.410; 1977 c.804 §30; 1979 c.677 §2; 1979 c.839 §20; 1981 c.535 §45; 1981 c.723 §5; 1981 c.854 §49a; 1981 c.876 §9; 1985 c.600 §16; 1985 c.706 §4; 1985 c.770 §4; 1987 c.884 §2; 1990 c.2 §40; 1995 c.332 §55; amendments by 1995 c.332 §55a repealed by 1999 c.6 §1; 1999 c.313 §10; 1999 c.876 §9; 2003 c.170 §7; 2003 c.171 §1; 2003 c.657 §§3,4; 2003 c.811 §§17,18; 2005 c.26 §§16,17; 2005 c.653 §§1,2a; 2007 c.241 §§4,5; 2007 c.270 §§7,8; 2007 c.274 §2; 2013 c.162 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 126 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 60× “The majority is wrong to conclude that the Board does not have the authority to review the validity of a temporary rule adopted by the director pursuant to ORS 656.”
Suchi v. SAIF Corp., 241 P.3d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 20× “214(l)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS 656.726, expressed as a percentage of the whole person.”
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991). · cites it 14× “" ORS 656.726(3)(a). [5] This phrase was added to the statute in 1987.”
Schleiss v. SAIF Corp., 317 P.3d 244 (Or. 2013). · cites it 7× “214, which authorizes awards of PPD, provides, in part, that, *641 “(l)(a) ‘Impairment’ means the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS…”
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 9 P.3d 114 (Or. 2000). · cites it 22× “This action was within the Director’s authority pursuant to ORS 656.726([4)](f)(C).” On claimant’s petition for judicial review of the Board’s decision, a divided Court of Appeals affirmed.”
Fred Meyer Stores v. Godfrey, 180 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 14× “Indeed, ORS 656.726(5) provides the board with the authority to make rules of practice and procedure in connection with the proceedings before it: "The board may make and declare all rules which are reasonably required in the performance of its duties, including but not limited…”
Trujillo v. Pac. Saf. Supply, 84 P.3d 119 (Or. 2004). · cites it 6× “” 16 ORS 656.726 provides generally for the duties and powers of the director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services to administer the workers’ compensation laws.”
Caren v. Providence Health Sys. Or. (In re Caren), 446 P.3d 67 (Or. 2019). · cites it 3× “6 The pertinent portions of that statute specify: *72 "(1) As used in this section: "(a) 'Impairment' means the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance **474 with the standards…”
Carroll v. Boise Cascade Corp., 910 P.2d 1111 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “And it provides that earning capacity is to be calculated by “using the standards specified in ORS 656.726-(3)(f),” which provides that earning capacity *616 “shall be permanent impairment due to the industrial injury as modified by the factors of age, education and adaptability…”
Brown v. SAIF Corp., 391 P.3d 773 (Or. 2017). “In fact, throughout the workers’ compensation statutes, the term “medical evidence” refers to the evidence required to establish medical conditions such as the extent of impairment, ORS 656.726(4)(f)(B) (extent of impairment from disability must be “established by a…”
Trujillo v. Pac. Saf. Supply, 45 P.3d 1017 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “' ORS 656.726(4)(f)(A). The Department of Consumer and Business Services provides formulas for expressing these modifying factors as numbers.”
Barackman v. Gen. Tel. Co. of Nw., Inc., 548 P.2d 1341 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 6× “As it is specifically authorized to do by ORS 656.726(4), [3] the Board has adopted administrative rules governing the procedures on its own-motion-jurisdiction cases.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(2) — 7 cases
Arvidson v. Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp., 467 P.3d 741 (Or. 2020).
State Accident Ins. Fund Corp. v. Broadway Cab Co., 629 P.2d 829 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 624 P.2d 1078 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
Weems v. Am. Int'l Adjustment Co., 874 P.2d 72 (Or. 1994).
Jordan v. SAIF Corp., 106 P.3d 663 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(2)(b) — 1 case
Coman v. Corr. Dep't, 960 P.2d 383 (Or. 1998).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3) — 12 cases
Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Smith, 857 P.2d 187 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 624 P.2d 1078 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “The majority is wrong to conclude that the Board does not have the authority to review the validity of a temporary rule adopted by the director pursuant to ORS 656.”
Clausing v. K-Mart Corp., 926 P.2d 337 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Buddenberg v. Southcoast Lumber, 826 P.2d 1062 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(a) — 5 cases
Cook v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 758 P.2d 854 (Or. 1988).
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991). “" ORS 656.726(3)(a). [5] This phrase was added to the statute in 1987.”
England v. Thunderbird & Saif Corp., 848 P.2d 100 (Or. 1993).
SAIF Corp. v. Baer, 656 P.2d 959 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
Rager v. EBI Companies, 810 P.2d 1315 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(f) — 14 cases
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “The majority is wrong to conclude that the Board does not have the authority to review the validity of a temporary rule adopted by the director pursuant to ORS 656.”
Carroll v. Boise Cascade Corp., 910 P.2d 1111 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “And it provides that earning capacity is to be calculated by “using the standards specified in ORS 656.726-(3)(f),” which provides that earning capacity *616 “shall be permanent impairment due to the industrial injury as modified by the factors of age, education and adaptability…”
England v. Thunderbird & Saif Corp., 848 P.2d 100 (Or. 1993).
Harrison v. Taylor Lumber & Treating, Inc., 826 P.2d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 624 P.2d 1078 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(f)(A) — 4 cases
Carroll v. Boise Cascade Corp., 910 P.2d 1111 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “And it provides that earning capacity is to be calculated by “using the standards specified in ORS 656.726-(3)(f),” which provides that earning capacity *616 “shall be permanent impairment due to the industrial injury as modified by the factors of age, education and adaptability…”
England v. Thunderbird & Saif Corp., 848 P.2d 100 (Or. 1993).
Schultz v. Springfield Forest Prods., 951 P.2d 169 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Petkovich v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 911 P.2d 362 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(f)(B) — 6 cases
Hicks v. SAIF Corp., 100 P.3d 1129 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
SAIF Corp. v. Gaffke, 954 P.2d 179 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
Atkins v. Allied Sys., Ltd., 29 P.3d 1139 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
Snyder v. Barrett Bus. Servs., Inc., 939 P.2d 47 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
SAIF Corp. v. Williamson, 882 P.2d 621 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(f)(C) — 6 cases
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “The majority is wrong to conclude that the Board does not have the authority to review the validity of a temporary rule adopted by the director pursuant to ORS 656.”
Gallino v. Courtesy Pontiac-Buick-GMC, 863 P.2d 530 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 9 P.3d 114 (Or. 2000). “This action was within the Director’s authority pursuant to ORS 656.726([4)](f)(C).” On claimant’s petition for judicial review of the Board’s decision, a divided Court of Appeals affirmed.”
Gevers v. Roadrunner Constr., 965 P.2d 1047 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
May v. Multnomah Cnty. Animal Control, 33 P.3d 387 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(f)(D) — 2 cases
Petkovich v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 902 P.2d 137 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
Petkovich v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 911 P.2d 362 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(3)(g) — 3 cases
Renolds-Croft, Inc. v. Bill Morrison Co., 638 P.2d 495 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
SAIF Corp. v. Baer, 656 P.2d 959 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
Long v. Argonaut Ins., 10 P.3d 958 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4) — 19 cases
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991). “" ORS 656.726(3)(a). [5] This phrase was added to the statute in 1987.”
Suchi v. SAIF Corp., 241 P.3d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “214(l)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS 656.726, expressed as a percentage of the whole person.”
Barackman v. Gen. Tel. Co. of Nw., Inc., 548 P.2d 1341 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “As it is specifically authorized to do by ORS 656.726(4), [3] the Board has adopted administrative rules governing the procedures on its own-motion-jurisdiction cases.”
Caren v. Providence Health Sys. Or. (In re Caren), 446 P.3d 67 (Or. 2019). “6 The pertinent portions of that statute specify: *72 "(1) As used in this section: "(a) 'Impairment' means the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance **474 with the standards…”
Gramada v. SAIF, 532 P.3d 539 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(a) — 5 cases
Saif Corp. v. Ramos, 287 P.3d 1220 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
McDermott v. SAIF Corp., 398 P.3d 964 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
Martin v. SAIF Corp., 270 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Roseburg Forest Prods. v. Humbert, 158 P.3d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(d) — 1 case
Trujillo v. Pac. Saf. Supply, 84 P.3d 119 (Or. 2004). “” 16 ORS 656.726 provides generally for the duties and powers of the director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services to administer the workers’ compensation laws.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f) — 8 cases
Caren v. Providence Health Sys. Or. (In re Caren), 446 P.3d 67 (Or. 2019). “6 The pertinent portions of that statute specify: *72 "(1) As used in this section: "(a) 'Impairment' means the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance **474 with the standards…”
McDermott v. SAIF Corp., 398 P.3d 964 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
Ainsworth v. SAIF Corp., 124 P.3d 616 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
Walker v. Providence Health Sys. Oregon, 340 P.3d 91 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
Schleiss v. SAIF Corp., 281 P.3d 626 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(A) — 9 cases
Schleiss v. SAIF Corp., 317 P.3d 244 (Or. 2013). “214, which authorizes awards of PPD, provides, in part, that, *641 “(l)(a) ‘Impairment’ means the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS…”
Trujillo v. Pac. Saf. Supply, 45 P.3d 1017 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “' ORS 656.726(4)(f)(A). The Department of Consumer and Business Services provides formulas for expressing these modifying factors as numbers.”
Ainsworth v. SAIF Corp., 124 P.3d 616 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
Trujillo v. Pac. Saf. Supply, 84 P.3d 119 (Or. 2004). “” 16 ORS 656.726 provides generally for the duties and powers of the director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services to administer the workers’ compensation laws.”
Khrul v. Foremans Cleaners, 93 P.3d 820 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(B) — 6 cases
Brown v. SAIF Corp., 391 P.3d 773 (Or. 2017). “In fact, throughout the workers’ compensation statutes, the term “medical evidence” refers to the evidence required to establish medical conditions such as the extent of impairment, ORS 656.726(4)(f)(B) (extent of impairment from disability must be “established by a…”
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
In the Matter of Comp. of Owens, 273 P.3d 376 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Marholin v. SAIF, 343 Or. App. 135 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Brown v. SAIF (Or. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(C) — 5 cases
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 9 P.3d 114 (Or. 2000). “This action was within the Director’s authority pursuant to ORS 656.726([4)](f)(C).” On claimant’s petition for judicial review of the Board’s decision, a divided Court of Appeals affirmed.”
Off. Depot, Inc. v. Joerres, 99 P.3d 789 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
May v. Multnomah Cnty. Animal Control, 33 P.3d 387 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
Thrifty Payless, Inc. v. Cole, 269 P.3d 76 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Dubray v. SAIF Corp., 27 P.3d 519 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(D) — 3 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Banderas, 286 P.3d 1237 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
SAIF Corp. v. Terleski, 246 P.3d 94 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Saif v. Terleski, 246 P.3d 94 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(D)(i) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. VanBibber, 227 P.3d 1224 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(E) — 5 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Suchi v. SAIF Corp., 241 P.3d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “214(l)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS 656.726, expressed as a percentage of the whole person.”
Schleiss v. SAIF Corp., 281 P.3d 626 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Vilca-Inca v. SAIF, 336 Or. App. 349 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
Vilca-Inca v. SAIF, 336 Or. App. 349 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(E)(iii) — 1 case
Suchi v. SAIF Corp., 241 P.3d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “214(l)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS 656.726, expressed as a percentage of the whole person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(f)(b) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(g) — 2 cases
Icenhower v. SAIF Corp., 43 P.3d 431 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
Roseburg Forest Prods. v. Humbert, 158 P.3d 21 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4)(i)(E)(iii) — 1 case
Suchi v. SAIF Corp., 241 P.3d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “214(l)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury or occupational disease determined in accordance with the standards provided under ORS 656.726, expressed as a percentage of the whole person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(4Kf) — 1 case
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 9 P.3d 114 (Or. 2000). “This action was within the Director’s authority pursuant to ORS 656.726([4)](f)(C).” On claimant’s petition for judicial review of the Board’s decision, a divided Court of Appeals affirmed.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(5) — 11 cases
Fred Meyer Stores v. Godfrey, 180 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “Indeed, ORS 656.726(5) provides the board with the authority to make rules of practice and procedure in connection with the proceedings before it: "The board may make and declare all rules which are reasonably required in the performance of its duties, including but not limited…”
Jordan v. SAIF Corp., 167 P.3d 451 (Or. 2007).
SAIF Corp. v. Kurcin, 50 P.3d 1167 (Or. 2002).
Morgan v. Stimson Lumber Co., 607 P.2d 150 (Or. 1980).
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991). “" ORS 656.726(3)(a). [5] This phrase was added to the statute in 1987.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(5)(a) — 1 case
McGuire v. SAIF, 507 P.3d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(7) — 1 case
Schlecht v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 653 P.2d 1284 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.726(f) — 1 case
Shubert v. Blue Chips, 951 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “The majority is wrong to conclude that the Board does not have the authority to review the validity of a temporary rule adopted by the director pursuant to 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.