Preview:

Filed: December 30, 2011 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON NANCY E. PETOCK, Petitioner on Review, v. ASANTE, formerly known as ASANTE HEATH SYSTEM dba ROGUE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER, a domestic nonprofit corporation, Respondent on Review. (CC 08104117; CA A141216; SC S059046) On review of an order of the Court of Appeals.* Argued and submitted June 7, 2011. Craig Crispin, Crispin Employment Lawyers, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioner on review. Robyn Ridler Aoyagi, Tonkon Torp LLP, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent on review. Amy Joseph Pedersen, Stoel Rives LLP, Portland, filed the brief for amicus curiae Associated Oregon Industries, Inc. Before De Muniz, Chief Justice, and Durham, Balmer, Kistler, Walters, and Linder, Justices.** KISTLER, J. The decision of the Court of Appeals affirmed. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. *Appeal from Jackson County Circuit Court, Mark Schiveley, Judge. 237 Or App 113, 240 P3d 56 (2010). **Landau, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

KISTLER, J. A worker who suffers a "compensable injury" may seek compensation for the injury and, for three years following the injury, also may demand reinstatement to his or her former position of employment. See Armstrong v. Rogue Federal Credit Union, 328 Or 154, 161, 969 P2d 382 (1998). Additionally, for five years following the injury, the worker may seek compensation if the condition resulting from the injury worsens. ORS 656.273. The primary question in this case is whether a workplace injury that plaintiff characterized, in filing a workers' compensation claim, as an aggravation or worsening of an earlier compensable injury can give rise to a new three-year period in which she can demand reinstatement or reemployment. The trial court held that it could not and granted defendant's summary judgment motion. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Petock v. Asante, 237 Or App 113, 240 P3d 56, adh'd to as clarified on recons, 238 Or App 711, 243 P3d 822 (2010). Although the Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court that an aggravation of an earlier injury cannot give rise to new reinstatement rights, it concluded that there was a disputed issue of fact as to whether plaintiff had sustained a "new and separate injury" in 2005 that would give rise to those rights. See 238 Or App at at 714 (clarifying holding on reconsideration). On review, plaintiff argues primarily that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that an aggravation of an earlier injury cannot give rise to a right to reinstatement under ORS 659A.043 or a right to reemployment under ORS 659A.046. Defendant, for its part, contends that the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the medical evidence 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

adduced on summary judgment was sufficient to permit a reasonable trier of fact to find that the injury that plaintiff suffered was "compensable" within the meaning of ORS 656.005(7)(a). We allowed review to consider those issues and now affirm the Court of Appeals decision, although our reasoning differs in some respects from that of the Court of Appeals. Defendant owns and operates the Rogue Valley Medical Center in Medford.1 Plaintiff "began [her] employment at the Rogue Valley Medical Center in 1993 and * * * was employed there * * * as a dietary aid in Emilia's Coffee Shop," a caf

Download S059046 Petock v. Asante.pdf

Oregon Law