Full text
In the Matter of the Compensation of Robert L. Dietz, Robert L. DIETZ, on Review v. RAMUDA and SAIF Corporation, on Review
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Review dismissed as improvidently allowed.
Fadeley and Durham, JJ., would not dismiss.
Loading…
Loading…
Opinion
1995 Ore. LEXIS 102 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 3, 1995
Full text
In the Matter of the Compensation of Robert L. Dietz, Robert L. DIETZ, on Review v. RAMUDA and SAIF Corporation, on Review
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 16, 2005
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 22, 2005
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 9, 2005
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 2, 2005
Parentheticals
recognizing that the fact that a work injury precipitated a claimant's condition does not necessarily mean that it was the major contributing cause
recognizing that the fact that a work injury precipitated a claimant’s condition does not necessarily mean that it was the major contributing cause
determining major contributing cause involves evaluating the relative contribution of different causes of an injury or disease and deciding which is the primary cause
in determining the major contributing cause of a condition, persuasive medical opinion must evaluate the relative contribution of different causes and explain why work exposure or injury contributes more to the claimed condition than all other causes or exposures combined