Legal Opinion

Aetna Cas. & Sur. v. SUE A. BLANTON, DC

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 21, 1996No. 94-027; CA A85910PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.

In this medical services dispute, insurer seeks review of a final order of the director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services requiring reimbursement for chiropractic treatment provided to a workers’ compensation claimant. The issue is whether the director lawfully may order reimbursement of chiropractic treatment when the treatment was provided without a written treatment plan approved and signed by the injured worker’s treating physician. The director held that, although the applicable administrative rule provides that reimbursement shall not be required in the absence of an…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harsh Investment Corp. v. State Ex Rel. State Housing DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  2. Albertson's, Inc. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. EightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Peek v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  2. SAIF Corporation v. EllerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  3. SAIF Corp. v. RossCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  4. Deschutes County v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  5. Peek v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API