MATTER OF KELLEY, 54 Van Natta 1860 (Or. Work. Comp. 10/8/2002)

• Decision Date: 08 October 2002
• Docket Number: WCB Case No. 01-05486.
• Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of RANDALL E. KELLEY, Claimant.
• Court: Oregon Workers' Compensation Division

Page 1860

54 Van Natta 1860

In the Matter of the Compensation of RANDALL E. KELLEY, Claimant.

WCB Case No. 01-05486.

Oregon Workers' Compensation Division.

October 8, 2002.

Welch Bruun & Green, Claimant Attorneys.

Johnson Nyburg & Andersen, Defense Attorneys.

Reviewing Panel: Members Langer and Phillips Polich.

ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

Claimant requests reconsideration of that portion of our September 17, 2002 order that awarded his counsel an $1,800 assessed attorney fee under ORS 656.382(2). Asking that we consider all of the factors in OAR 438-015-0010(4), claimant contends that the attorney fee award should be increased to $7,700.

On reconsideration, claimant contends that we placed undue emphasis on the time devoted to the case. To the contrary, in our initial order, we noted that we had considered all of the factors in the administrative rule. Specifically, we stated that we had considered the time devoted to the case, the complexity of the issues, the nature of the proceedings, the value of the interest involved, and the risk that claimant's counsel would go uncompensated. In footnote three, we noted claimant's request for a specific attorney fee, based on a calculation of ten percent of claimant's increased temporary disability benefits. We then reiterated that we had considered the value of the interest involved in determining a reasonable attorney fee, but noted that the factor was but one of many to be considered.

In addition, on reconsideration, we add the following. In deciding whether the requested fee is appropriate, we consider the factors in OAR 438-015-0010(4), which includes the time devoted to the case, the complexity of the issues, the value of the interest involved, the skill of the attorneys, the nature of the proceedings, the benefits secured, and the risk that an attorney's efforts may go uncompensated. See Schoch v. Leupold & Stevens, 162 Or App 242 (1999) (Board must explain the reasons why the factors considered lead to the conclusion that a specific fee is reasonable).

The hearing in this case lasted one hour and fifteen minutes. Two witnesses were called, one for claimant, and one for the insurer. The transcript consists of 22 pages. The issues at hearing were entitlement to additional temporary disability, rate of temporary disability, and penalties. Eight exhibits were received into evidence, five of which were submitted by claimant's attorney.¹

Claimant's respondent's brief on review was three pages. Claiman...