Legal Opinion

Crawford & Co. v. Baker-Withrow

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 2003No. S-10540PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MATTHEWS, Justice.

In 1990 Penny Baker-Withrow suffered an on-the-job injury that left her with post-traumatic stress disorder. Nine years later she began receiving Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing therapy. Her former employer refused her claim for payment on the grounds that her medical provider failed to submit a timely treatment plan. We conclude that her employer is responsible for all treatments rendered after a treatment plan was submitted, plus any treatments rendered not more than fourteen days before submission of the treatment plan.

L

While working for Crawford &…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Grove v. Alaska Construction & ErectorsAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Chiropractors for Justice v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Cole v. Ketchikan Pulp Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Cornelison v. TIG InsuranceAlaska Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Burke v. Houston Nana, L.L.C.Alaska Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Burke v. HOUSTON NANA, LLCAlaska Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Cornelison v. TIG InsuranceAlaska Supreme Court · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API