History
  • No items yet
midpage
Cook v. Workers' Compensation Department
742 P.2d 714
Or. Ct. App.
1987
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM

In this challenge to a rule of the Workers’ Compensation Department brought under ORS 183.400, petitioner seeks review of our decision, which “affirmed” without opinion. Cook v. Workers’ Compensation Dept., 85 Or App 219, 736 P2d 230 (1987). We consider the petition for review as one for reconsideration. ORAP 10.10. We allow reconsideration and uphold the rule.

A challenge to an administrative rule in this court is an original proceeding, and our determination of the rule’s validity should, generally, be by written opinion. Cook v. Workers’ Compensation Dept., 79 Or App 21, 717 P2d 658, rev den 301 Or 666 (1986).

We have considered petitioner’s arguments challenging the validity of OAR 436-10-050 and find them to be without merit.

Reconsideration allowed; rule upheld.

Case Details

Case Name: Cook v. Workers' Compensation Department
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Date Published: Sep 16, 1987
Citation: 742 P.2d 714
Docket Number: WCD 6-1985; CA A38782
Court Abbreviation: Or. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.