2017 ORS 656.591¹
Election not to bring action operates as assignment of cause of action
  • repayments to department by paying agency

(1) An election made pursuant to ORS 656.578 (Workers’ election whether to sue third person or noncomplying employer for damages) not to proceed against an employer or third person operates as an assignment to the paying agency of the cause of action, if any, of a worker or the beneficiaries or legal representative of a deceased worker against the employer or third person, and the paying agency may bring action against the employer or third person in the name of the worker or other beneficiaries.

(2) Any sum the paying agency recovers in excess of the expenses the paying agency incurred in making the recovery and the amount the paying agency expended for compensation, first aid or other medical, surgical or hospital service, together with the present value of the monthly payments of compensation to which the worker or other beneficiaries may be entitled under this chapter, must be paid to the worker or other beneficiaries.

(3) A paying agency shall repay the Department of Consumer and Business Services for any expenditures from the Consumer and Business Services Fund, the Self-Insured Employer Adjustment Reserve, the Self-Insured Employer Group Adjustment Reserve or the Workers’ Benefit Fund that the department makes, together with the present value of any reasonably expected future expenditures from the funds or reserves that the department may make, to reimburse the paying agency for the paying agency’s costs and to compensate or pay other costs of a worker’s claim because of a self-insured employer’s or self-insured employer group’s insolvency, default or decertification. [Formerly 656.320; 2017 c.69 §2]

Notes of Decisions

Claimant seeking to rescind assign­ment needs only to show that decision could reasonably have been affected had true facts been known, not that assign­ment resulted from being misled. EBI Companies v. Cooper, 100 Or App 246, 785 P2d 380 (1990)

Plaintiff insurer was entitled to maintain ac­tion as injured worker’s assignee against per­son whose con­duct caused aggrava­tion to worker’s compensable injury. SAIF v. Meredith, 104 Or App 570, 802 P2d 95 (1990)

Law Review Cita­tions

55 OLR 432-445 (1976); 16 WLR 519 (1979); 22 WLR 559 (1986)

Chapter 656

Notes of Decisions

Party having af­firm­a­tive of any issue must prove it by preponderance of evidence unless legislature fixes some different quantum of proof. Hutcheson v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 288 Or 51, 602 P2d 268 (1979)

Amend­ments to existing statutes and enact­ment of addi­tional statutes by 1995 legisla­tion generally apply to pending cases and to orders still ap­pealable on June 7, 1995, effective date. Volk v. America West Air­lines, 135 Or App 565, 899 P2d 746 (1995), Sup Ct review denied

Amend­ments to existing statutes and enact­ment of addi­tional statutes by 1995 legisla­tion do not extend or shorten procedural time limita­tions with regard to ac­tions taken prior to June 7, 1995, effective date. Motel 6 v. McMasters, 135 Or App 583, 899 P2d 1212 (1995)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Benefit unavailability for inmates engaged in prison work programs, (1996) Vol 48, p 134

Law Review Cita­tions

24 WLR 321, 341 (1988); 32 WLR 217 (1996)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 656—Workers’ Compensation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors656.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 656, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano656.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
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.