From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Emmons v. Saif

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 30, 1978
579 P.2d 305 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

No. WCB 77-1138, SAIF ZD 188295, CA 9813

Submitted on record and briefs April 26, affirmed May 30, 1978

Judicial Review from Workers' Compensation Board.

David W. Hittle, Rolf Olson, and Dye Olson, Salem, filed the brief for petitioner.

Lester R. Huntsinger, Associate Counsel, State Accident Insurance Fund, Salem, filed the brief for respondent. With him on the brief were K. R. Maloney, Chief Counsel, and James A. Blevins, Chief Trial Counsel, State Accident Insurance Fund, Salem.

Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Johnson, Gillette and Roberts, Judges.


Affirmed.

JOHNSON, J.


The issue in this workers' compensation case is the extent of claimant's permanent disability resulting from an unscheduled back injury. The case presents both factual and legal questions. For the reasons stated in Bowman v. Oregon Transfer Company, 33 Or. App. 241, 576 P.2d 27 (1978), we will not detail the facts. We agree with the referee and the Workers' Compensation Board that claimant was not totally disabled and we agree with the award of 50% permanent partial disability made by the Board.

With respect to the legal question, claimant maintains that both the referee and the Board erred in not taking into consideration in determining the extent of his disability the effects of a disabling stroke, unrelated to his back injury, which he suffered after the injury but before the referee's hearing. We disagree. In determining the extent of unscheduled disability, we look to claimant's loss of earning capacity, taking into consideration claimant's intelligence, education, trainability, age and general suitability to the existing job market. Blackford v. SAIF, 17 Or. App. 358, 361, 521 P.2d 1092 (1974). Ordinarily, we focus on these factors as they existed at the time of the hearing. However, this case presents the exception to that approach because, unlike a pre-existing disability, see ORS 656.206(1)(a), a subsequent non-compensable injury is not relevant in determining the extent of the worker's permanent disability. See Christensen v. SAIF, 27 Or. App. 595, 557 P.2d 48 (1976); Jones v. Steve Wilson Co., 10 Or. App. 7, 498 P.2d 387 (1972); cf. 2 A. Larson, Workmen's Compensation Law 10-315, § 59.32 (1976). Thus, we determine claimant's loss of earning capacity as of the time immediately prior to his stroke, and we agree with the Board that at that time claimant was not totally disabled.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Emmons v. Saif

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 30, 1978
579 P.2d 305 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

Emmons v. Saif

Case Details

Full title:EMMONS, Petitioner, v. STATE ACCIDENT INSURANCE FUND, Respondent

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: May 30, 1978

Citations

579 P.2d 305 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
579 P.2d 305

Citing Cases

Nyre v. F & R Leasing

Claimant asserts that the Board mistakenly assumed that the referee had considered the noncompensable…

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Rees

Whether some portion of claimant's disability is caused by post-injury natural worsening of her pre-existing…