2007 ORS 657.875¹
Extending period for appeal in certain claim and contribution matters

The period within which an interested party may request a hearing or file with the Employment Appeals Board an application for review as provided in ORS 657.266 (Initial determination of eligibility and amount of benefits) to 657.269 (Decision becomes final without request for hearing), 657.270 (Hearing), 657.471 (Manner of charging benefits to employer), 657.480 (Effect of transfer of trade or business), 657.485 (Notice of rate), 657.679 (Determination that employing unit or employment is subject to this chapter), 657.681 (Computation and assessment of employer contributions and interest) and 657.682 (Assessments against reorganized business entity) may be extended, upon a showing of good cause therefor, a reasonable time under the circumstances of each particular case. [1973 c.300 §14; 1975 c.257 §11; 1993 c.778 §17; 2005 c.214 §4; 2007 c.49 §2]

Notes of Decisions

The applicant's decision not to have mail forwarded does not excuse a failure to file timely notices of ap­peal. Anderson v. Employ­ment Div., 24 Or App 503, 546 P2d 779 (1976)

The time limit stated in ORS 657.471 (Manner of charging benefits to employer) (7) is not subject to extension under this sec­tion. Gilberts v. Employ­ment Div., 29 Or App 597, 564 P2d 1073 (1977)

Terms "good cause" and "a reasonable time" are delegative terms calling for policy judg­ment by agency. Sayers v. Employ­ment Division, 59 Or App 270, 650 P2d 1024 (1982)

Attorney's neg­li­gent failure to timely file ap­peal is good cause only where untimely filing would be for good cause if attributed to claimant. McComas v. Employ­ment Dept., 133 Or App 577, 891 P2d 1351 (1995), Sup Ct review denied

Chapter 657

Notes of Decisions

An individual who performs services for remunera­tion is an employee, and per­son or organiza­tion for whom services are performed is an employer under terms of Employ­ment Division Law even if remunera­tion is paid indirectly rather than directly unless employer shows that some statutory exclusion applies. Lectro Lift, Inc. v. Morgan, 14 Or App 316, 513 P2d 526 (1973)

Mere act of incorporating as professional corpora­tion does not, by itself, create employer-employee rela­tionship for purposes of this chapter. Peterson v. Employ­ment Division, 82 Or App 371, 728 P2d 95 (1986)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Determining employer of musicians' group, (1972) Vol 35, p 1306

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 657—Unemployment Insurance, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­657.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 657, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­657ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.