Legal Opinion

Hathaway v. Health Future Enterprises

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 29, 1993No. WCB 90-21435; CA A72995PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, P. J.

Claimant seeks review of a Workers’ Compensation Board order holding that the Board did not have jurisdiction to determine whether claimant’s proposed palliative chiropractic treatment is compensable. We affirm.

After claimant became medically stationary and her claim was closed, her attending physician sought approval from employer’s insurer, SAIF, for proposed palliative chiropractic treatment, pursuant to ORS 656.245(l)(b). That paragraph provides, in part:

“[A]fter the worker has become medically stationary, palliative care is not compensable, except when provided to a worker who has been…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Meyers v. Darigold, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hathaway v. Health Future EnterprisesOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Nicholson v. Salem Area TransitCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. Nicholson v. Salem Area Transit & Saif Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Wall v. Raising Preschool, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  5. Kenfield v. Health Future, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API