No. 07-01507 (2008). CYNTHIA E. BEATTY, Claimant.

• Court: Oregon

Oregon Worker Compensation 2008. No. 07-01507 (2008). CYNTHIA E. BEATTY, Claimant In the Matter of the Compensation of CYNTHIA E. BEATTY, ClaimantWCB Case No. 07-01507CORRECTED ORDER ON REVIEWDodge Law Firm, Claimant Attorneys James B Northrop, SAIF Legal, Defense AttorneysReviewing Panel: Members Weddell and Langer.On December 11, 2008, we reversed an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) order that had upheld the SAIF Corporation's denial of her injury claim for her right hamstring, right knee, and right shoulder conditions. It has come to our attention that our order contains a clerical error. Specifically, a portion of the last sentence on Page 4 of our prior opinion was inadvertently omitted. To correct this oversight, we withdraw our December 11 order and replace it with the following order. The parties' 30-day rights of appeal shall begin to run from the date of this order. Claimant requests review of ALJ Brazeau's order that upheld the SAIF Corporation's denial of her injury claim for her right hamstring, right knee, and right shoulder conditions. On review, the issue is course and scope of employment. We reverse. FINDINGS OF FACT We adopt the ALJ's "Findings of Fact." CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND OPINION Before her work shift on November 30, 2006, claimant was walking on a pathway from the employer's parking lot to her workplace and fell, sustaining injuries to her right side. She filed a claim for her injuries, which SAIF denied. Claimant requested a hearing. Reasoning that claimant had not persuasively excluded idiopathic causes of her fall, the ALJ found that she had not proven that the accident had arisen out of employment.(fn1) On review, claimant contends that her injury arose out of and in the course of employment. We agree with claimant's contention. To establish compensability of her accidental injuries, claimant must prove that they arose "out of and in the course of employment." ORS 656.005(7)(a). The requirement that an injury arise "in the course of employment" concerns the time, place, and circumstances of the injury. Norpac Foods, Inc. v. Gilmore, 318 Or 363, 366 (1994). The requirement that an injury arise "out of" employment concerns the causal relationship between the injury and the employment. Id. Although we consider each prong in our analysis, we do so in the context of a unitary "work connection" test to determine the relationship between an injury and the claimant's work. Rogers v. SAIF, 289 Or 633, 643-44 (1980). Therefore, we evaluate both prongs, but neither is dispositive. Norpac Foods, 318 Or at 366. Injuries incurred while going to...