Sexton v. Sky Lakes Medical Center

“[R]equiring a previous acceptance of a preexisting condition that [an] employer determined not to be compensable would be illogical, even in the case of a new or omitted condition, because the ‘employer would be required to accept a claim for which no benefits are due.’” Tektronix, Inc. v. Nazari, 117 Or App 409, 844 P2d 258 (1992), adh’d to as modified on recons, 120 Or App 590, rev den, 318 Or 27 (1993).

Claimant had preexisting back problems preceding a workplace injury. Claimant’s employer denied a worker’s compensation claim involving injuries to Claimant’s lumbar spine. The Worker’s Compensation Board found that Employer met its burden and showed that the major contributor to Claimant’s injuries was her preexisting condition, not the workplace injury, and upheld the denial. Claimant sought judicial review and alleged that the Board improperly analyzed her claim as a “combined condition” claim under ORS 656.005(7)(a)(B). Specifically, Claimant argued that Employer must have accepted her preexisting condition before it could treat her new claim as a “combined condition” claim. “[R]equiring a previous acceptance of a preexisting condition that [an] employer determined not to be compensable would be illogical, even in the case of a new or omitted condition, because the ‘employer would be required to accept a claim for which no benefits are due.’” Tektronix, Inc. v. Nazari, 117 Or App 409, 844 P2d 258 (1992), adh’d to as modified on recons, 120 Or App 590, rev den, 318 Or 27 (1993). The Court held that, as a matter of law, Employer was not required to accept Claimant’s preexisting condition and the denial was therefore proper. Affirmed.