Columbia Forest Products v. Woolner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “in other workers’ compensation contests, we have held that evidence need not consist of ‘magic words’ in order to adequately support the Board’s findings.”
• “The scope of an employer’s acceptance has always been an issue of fact.” (Emphasis in original.)
• “The scope of an employer’s acceptance has always been an issue of fact.” (Citation omitted; emphasis in original.)
• “There is no statute that prescribes a particular manner for acceptance of a combined condition.”
• scope of an acceptance is a question of fact

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).