Interiano v. SAIF

Under ORS 656.005(7)(a)(B), two separate conditions must be identified; a “preexisting condition and its symptoms are not separate conditions.” Carrillo v. SAIF, 310 Or App 8, 12, 484 P3d 398, rev den, 368 Or 560 (2021).

Claimant appealed a final order from the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) concluding that her claim for a lower-back injury “was not compensable under ORS 656.005(7)(a)(B).”  On appeal, Claimant argued that the Board erred when it “concluded that her preexisting conditions and the symptoms of those conditions brought on by the work injury” represented two medical problems that created a “combined condition.”  In response, SAIF contended that a medical condition need not be separate and distinct from the preexisting condition to qualify as a combined condition.  Under ORS 656.005(7)(a)(B), two separate conditions must be identified; a “preexisting condition and its symptoms are not separate conditions.”  Carrillo v. SAIF, 310 Or App 8, 12, 484 P3d 398, rev den, 368 Or 560 (2021).  The Court found that, as in Carrillo, the Board failed to identify the existence of two separate conditions.  Thus, the Court held that “the [B]oard erred in determining that [C]laimant had a combined condition.”  Reversed and remanded.