From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caline v. Maede

Oregon Supreme Court
Dec 15, 1964
396 P.2d 694 (Or. 1964)

Summary

relying on and applying Jenkins and Heikkila

Summary of this case from Kilminster v. Day Management Corp.

Opinion

Argued November 4, 1964

Affirmed November 12, 1964 Petition for rehearing denied December 15, 1964

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.

ALFRED T. SULMONETTI, Judge.

Adelbert G. Clostermann, Portland, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

George S. Woodworth, Assistant Attorney General, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Robert Y. Thornton, Attorney General, and Ray H. Lafky, Assistant Attorney General, Salem.

Before McALLISTER, Chief Justice, and PERRY, SLOAN, O'CONNELL, GOODWIN, DENECKE and LUSK, Justices.


IN BANC


AFFIRMED.


Plaintiff brought this action for damages for personal injuries against his employer. The only question is whether the employer's continued failure to rectify conditions which twice previously injured plaintiff constitutes "the deliberate intention * * * to produce such injury." ORS 656.156(2). If it does, plaintiff can maintain this action; if not, plaintiff's only remedy is Workmen's Compensation benefits.

Upon the authority of Jenkins v. Carman Mfg. Co., 79 Or. 448, 155 P. 703 (1916), and Heikkila v. Ewen Transfer Co., 135 Or. 631, 297 P. 373 (1931), the trial court's ruling that this does not constitute "deliberate intention" is affirmed.


Summaries of

Caline v. Maede

Oregon Supreme Court
Dec 15, 1964
396 P.2d 694 (Or. 1964)

relying on and applying Jenkins and Heikkila

Summary of this case from Kilminster v. Day Management Corp.

In Caline, the court held that an employer's failure to correct conditions which had injured the worker twice before did not constitute a deliberate intention to harm the worker.

Summary of this case from Palmer v. Bi-Mart Company
Case details for

Caline v. Maede

Case Details

Full title:CALINE v. MAEDE ET AL, STATE INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION

Court:Oregon Supreme Court

Date published: Dec 15, 1964

Citations

396 P.2d 694 (Or. 1964)
396 P.2d 694

Citing Cases

Palmer v. Bi-Mart Company

Defendants contend that, even if Bi-Mart's failure to act on plaintiff's complaint constituted a ratification…

Meagher v. Lamb-Weston, Inc.

Id. The court carefully distinguished prior decisions by the state's highest court. See Bakker v. Baza'r,…