Kepford v. Weyerhaeuser Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a second claim was not precluded, because the evidence presented at the hearing on that claim represented “a new set of facts that could not have been litigated” at the hearing on the first claim
• claim preclusion rules against splitting a claim do not apply where basis for later claim did not yet exist at time of earlier decision
• prior work injuries may be considered as part of the overall employment conditions for purposes of an occupational disease claim
• the cumulative effect of injuries and conditions of employment can constitute an occupational disease

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).