In re Compensation of Parker, 103119 ORWC, 18-02114

Case DateOctober 31, 2019
CourtOregon
71 Van Natta 1250 (2019)
In the Matter of the Compensation of THOMAS L. PARKER, Claimant
WCB No. 18-02114
Oregon Worker Compensation
October 31, 2019
          Unrepresented Claimant.           SAIF Legal Salem, Defense Attorneys.           Reviewing Panel: Members Woodford and Lanning.           ORDER ON REVIEW          Claimant, pro se, 1 requests review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) McWilliams's order that upheld the SAIF Corporation's denial of claimant's new/omitted medical condition claim for an L4-5 disc protrusion. With his appellant's brief, claimant has submitted documents that were not presented/ admitted at the hearing. Because our review is limited to evidence admitted at the hearing, we treat this submission as a motion for remand to the ALJ. See ORS 656.295(5); Judy A. Britton, 37 Van Natta . On review, the issues are remand and compensability.          We adopt and affirm the ALJ's order with the following supplementation.          We may remand to the ALJ if we find that a case has been improperly, incompletely or otherwise insufficiently developed. ORS 656.295(5). There must be a compelling reason for remand to the ALJ for the taking of additional evidence. SAIF v. Avery, 167 Or.App. 327, 333 (2000). A compelling reason exists when the new evidence: (1) concerns disability; (2) was not obtainable at the time of the hearing; and (3) is reasonably likely to affect the outcome of the case. Id.; Compton v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 301 Or 641, 646 (1986).          Here, claimant submits documents (which are dated before and after the July 24, 2018, hearing), as well as certain documents that were already included in the record submitted to the ALJ. There is no indication why the additional documents were not obtainable at the time of the hearing. Moreover, while [71 Van Natta 1251] the documents include further statements from Dr. Lin concerning his medical opinion, those further statements do not change or contradict the portions of his medical opinion that have already been admitted to the record. Consequently, claimant's additional documentation is unlikely to change the outcome of this dispute...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT