Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 44-519 (2026)

Certificate of healthcare provider as evidence; exchange of medical reports by parties; testimony of healthcare provider admissible as evidence by submission of complete medical report; procedure; notice; disputes; medical records or reports of other healthcare providers

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

44-519. Certificate of healthcare provider as evidence; exchange of medical reports by parties; testimony of healthcare provider admissible as evidence by submission of complete medical report; procedure; notice; disputes; medical records or reports of other healthcare providers. (a) Except in preliminary hearings conducted under K.S.A. 44-534a, and amendments thereto, or as provided by subsection (c), (d), (e) or (f), no report of any examination of any employee by a healthcare provider, as provided for in the workers compensation act and no certificate issued or given by the healthcare provider making such examination, shall be competent evidence in any proceeding for the determining or collection of compensation unless supported by the testimony of such healthcare provider, if this testimony is admissible, and shall not be competent evidence in any case where testimony of such healthcare provider is not admissible.

(b) Except for hearings conducted under K.S.A. 44-534a, and amendments thereto, upon receipt of notice from the division setting a date for hearing of a case, the parties or their attorneys shall arrange, without charge or costs, each to the other, for an exchange of all medical reports, including those made both by treating and examining healthcare providers, to the end that the parties may be commonly informed of all medical findings and opinions. The exchange of medical reports shall be made at least 30 days before the date set for the hearing. The failure of any party to comply may be grounds for the administrative law judge to grant a party's request for additional time to present evidence.

(c) The testimony of a treating or examining healthcare provider may be submitted in evidence on the issues in controversy by a complete medical report and shall be admissible without other foundational evidence subject to compliance with the following procedures:

(1) The party intending to submit the complete medical report in evidence shall give notice to all parties at least 30 days prior to the hearing and shall provide a reasonable opportunity to all parties to cross-examine the healthcare provider who prepared the report within the offering party's terminal date. Each party shall compensate the healthcare provider for the portion of testimony obtained in an amount not to exceed a rate of reasonable compensation consistent with the Kansas medical fee schedule;

(2) the notice required in paragraph (1) shall include a copy of the curriculum vitae of the healthcare provider who prepared the complete medical report, the complete medical report and all the clinical and treatment records of the healthcare provider;

(3) the notice required in paragraph (1) shall also include copies of all records and reports received from any other source including all records and reports of other healthcare providers that the preparer of the complete medical report reviewed and relied upon in issuing the report. The copies of records and reports shall include, but not be limited to, all paper or media documents, videos, transcribed statements or sworn testimony reviewed and relied upon by the preparer of the complete medical report, except that for purposes of this paragraph, the copies of records and reports shall not include X-rays or other diagnostic studies; and

(4) at the request of any party, the party offering a complete medical report in evidence shall also make available copies of X-rays or other diagnostic studies obtained by or relied upon by the healthcare provider.

(d) Any dispute by a party as to whether a complete medical report offered by another party meets the requirements of a complete medical report shall be made within 10 days after receipt of the notice required by subsection (c) by providing written objections to the offering party stating the grounds for the dispute. Upon request of any party, the administrative law judge shall rule upon such objections at the hearing and determine whether the report meets the requirements of a complete medical report and the admissibility of the report. The 10-day rule may be extended for good cause. If no objections are made the report shall be admissible and any objections thereto shall be waived.

(e) Medical records or reports of other healthcare providers that were considered by the preparer of a complete medical report that has been received into evidence may also be admitted without further foundations subject to compliance with the following procedures:

(1) Such medical reports or records of such other healthcare providers have been certified by the offices of such healthcare providers, or the records custodians of such offices, as to the number of pages in the records and that such records are true and correct copies of the original records and are kept in the normal course of business of such healthcare providers; and

(2) the offered medical records or reports are limited to the examination and treatment of the same structure or structures as the injured worker's body part that was alleged to have been injured as a result of the work accident or repetitive trauma.

(f) Nothing in this section shall prevent the parties from agreeing to admit medical reports or records by consent.

History: L. 1927, ch. 232, § 18; L. 1990, ch. 182, § 9; L. 2000, ch. 160, § 11; L. 2024, ch. 27, § 15; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1988–2022 · leading case: Woessner v. Labor Max Staffing, 437 P.3d 992 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Woessner v. Labor Max Staffing, 437 P.3d 992 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 39× “Because of the importance of those examinations and ratings, another statute, K.S.A. 44-519, provides that "no report of any examination .”

Woessner v. Labor Max Staffing, 471 P.3d 1 (Kan. 2020). · cites it 9× “Because of the importance of those examinations and ratings, another statute, K.S.A. 44-519, provides that 'no report of any examination .”

Boeing Military Airplane Co. v. Enloe, 764 P.2d 462 (Kan. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 9× “The Fund contends that the only evidence supporting its liability was inadmissible under K.S.A. 44-519. The Fund also argues that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to increase claimant’s award because he did not appeal the director’s award of 40% permanent partial disability.”

Roberts v. J.C. Penney Co., 949 P.2d 613 (Kan. 1997). · cites it 24× “: This workers compensation appeal questions the construction of K.S.A. 44-519 relating to usage of written reports of health care providers by a vocational rehabilitation expert without the testimony of the health care provider being properly admitted as competent evidence in a…”

Gleason v. Samaritan Home & Church Mut. Ins., 926 P.2d 1349 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 4× “” For her first three issues challenging the decision of the Board, the claimant contends: (1) The decision is not supported by substantial competent evidence; (2) the decision incorrectly applies the law dealing with psychological injuries; and (3) the decision erroneously…”

McKinney v. Gen. Motors Corp., 921 P.2d 257 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 7× “See K.S.A. 44-519. McKinney responds that K.S.”

Shehane v. Station Casino & CNA Ins., 3 P.3d 551 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “44-510e(a) and K.S.A. 44-519 to allow the neutral medical report to be admitted into evidence without requiring supportive testimony.”

Anderson v. Scarlett Auto Interiors, 61 P.3d 81 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “They base this argument on the language of K.S.A. 44-519, which states: “Except in preliminary hearings conducted under K.”

Sims v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 933 P.2d 161 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Bieri’s function changed from that of providing an independent medical evaluation for the Administrative Law Judge to that of providing expert witness testimony for one or more of the parties.”

Roberts v. J.C. Penney Co., 935 P.2d 1079 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 7× “Roberts appeals from the ruling of the Workers Compensation Board (Board), which found that K.S.A. 44-519 requires the exclusion of vocational expert testimony regarding the percentage of a claimant’s work disability when that percentage is based on restrictions contained in…”

Turner v. Pleasant Acres (Kan. Ct. App. 2022). “This is because his modified opinion was based on additional information that was not discovered and provided to him until after he had rendered his initial opinion.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 44-519(a) — 1 case

Woessner v. Labor Max Staffing, 437 P.3d 992 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “Because of the importance of those examinations and ratings, another statute, K.S.A. 44-519, provides that "no report of any examination .”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.