From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Coghill

Oregon Court of Appeals
Sep 16, 1998
966 P.2d 830 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)

Opinion

Nos. INS 93-09-026; CA A96550.

On petitioner's Petition for Reconsideration filed September 16, 1998. Opinion filed September 2, 1998. 155 Or. App. 601, 964 P.2d 1085.

Judicial Review from Department of Consumer and Business Services.

Charles M. Fryer for the petition.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong, Judge, and Warden, Senior Judge.



Petitioner seeks reconsideration of our decision in Coghill v. Natl. Council on Comp. Ins., 155 Or. App. 601, 964 P.2d 1085 (1998), in which we upheld a determination that petitioner was required to provide workers' compensation coverage for certain siding installers in his employ. Petitioner contends that we made a factual error when we stated that "[t]he record before us does not show that installers worked with or for any other parties during the audit period." We agree with petitioner that there is information in the record to support a finding that the installers worked for other people during the audit period. Hence, we modify our earlier opinion to delete the quoted sentence. The deletion of the sentence does not change the reasoning on which we relied to uphold the agency's decision, and we adhere to our opinion as modified.

Petitioner also seeks reconsideration in a companion case, Coghill v. Natl. Council on Comp. Ins., 155 Or. App. 638, 964 P.2d 1090 (1998). We have denied that petition by order this date.

Reconsideration allowed; opinion modified and adhered to as modified.


Summaries of

In re Coghill

Oregon Court of Appeals
Sep 16, 1998
966 P.2d 830 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)
Case details for

In re Coghill

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Petition of Wayne E. COGHILL, dba Allstate Siding…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Sep 16, 1998

Citations

966 P.2d 830 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)
966 P.2d 830