Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of the Compensation of Cleo I. Beswick, Claimant. SAIF CORPORATION and Lane Community College, Petitioners, v. Cleo I. BESWICK, Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Employer seeks review of the Workers' Compensation Board's decision affirming the referee's order that granted claimant permanent total disability. We reverse and remand.

Employer contends that the case should be remanded, because the Board failed to make a finding about whether claimant was willing to seek employment. ORS 656.206 (3) provides:

"The worker has the burden of proving permanent total disability status and must establish that the worker is willing to seek regular gainful employment and that the worker has made reasonable efforts to obtain such employment."

In SAIF v. Stephen, 308 Or. 41, 48, 774 P.2d 1103 (1989), the Supreme Court held that futility excuses proof of reasonable efforts to gain employment, but proof of willingness to seek work is still required. It remanded the case for a finding on whether the claimant was willing to seek employment. See also SAIF v. Orr, 101 Or. App. 612, 792 P.2d 454 (1990). Here, the Board found that any efforts by claimant to seek employment would be futile but did not address whether she was willing to seek work. We remand for that determination.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SAIF CORPORATION v. BESWICK
(Nov 28, 1990)