Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
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)

In the Matter of the Compensation of Maria R. Porras, Claimant. PORRAS, Petitioner, v. CASTLE COOKE, INC., Respondent.

PER CURIAM

Remanded for reconsideration.

PER CURIAM

Claimant seeks review of a Workers' Compensation Board order that affirmed the portion of the referee's order awarding her 85 percent unscheduled permanent partial disability and modified the portion of the referee's order regarding the date she became medically stationary. The petition for judicial review was filed on August 19, 1987. The scope of review, therefore, requires us to determine if the Board order is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co., 90 Or. App. 200, 205, 752 P.2d 312 (1988). Because the Board order is inadequate for judicial review under the standards in Armstrong, we remand to the Board for reconsideration.

The portion of the referee's order that the Board affirmed is also inadequate for judicial review.

Remanded for reconsideration.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PORRAS v. CASTLE COOKE, INC
(Jun 15, 1988)