Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245 (2026)

Medical services to be provided; worker choice of provider; restrictions on providers outside managed care organizations; director exclusion of medical treatments; when workers to receive services as prescribed in managed care organization contract; provision of services by nurse practitioners and physician associates; administrative review of disapproved claims; rules

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      656.245 Medical services to be provided; worker choice of provider; restrictions on providers outside managed care organizations; director exclusion of medical treatments; when workers to receive services as prescribed in managed care organization contract; provision of services by nurse practitioners and physician associates; administrative review of disapproved claims; rules. (1)(a) For every compensable injury, the insurer or the self-insured employer shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury for such period as the nature of the injury or the process of the recovery requires, subject to the limitations in ORS 656.225, including such medical services as may be required after a determination of permanent disability. In addition, for consequential and combined conditions described in ORS 656.005 (7), the insurer or the self-insured employer shall cause to be provided only those medical services directed to medical conditions caused in major part by the injury.

      (b) Compensable medical services shall include medical, surgical, hospital, nursing, ambulances and other related services, and drugs, medicine, crutches and prosthetic appliances, braces and supports and where necessary, physical restorative services. A pharmacist or dispensing physician shall dispense generic drugs to the worker in accordance with ORS 689.515. The duty to provide such medical services continues for the life of the worker.

      (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, medical services after the worker’s condition is medically stationary are not compensable except for the following:

      (A) Services provided to a worker who has been determined to be permanently and totally disabled.

      (B) Prescription medications.

      (C) Services necessary to administer prescription medication or monitor the administration of prescription medication.

      (D) Prosthetic devices, braces and supports.

      (E) Services necessary to monitor the status, replacement or repair of prosthetic devices, braces and supports.

      (F) Services provided pursuant to an accepted claim for aggravation under ORS 656.273.

      (G) Services provided pursuant to an order issued under ORS 656.278.

      (H) Services that are necessary to diagnose the worker’s condition.

      (I) Life-preserving modalities similar to insulin therapy, dialysis and transfusions.

      (J) With the approval of the insurer or self-insured employer, palliative care that the worker’s attending physician referred to in ORS 656.005 (12)(b)(A) prescribes and that is necessary to enable the worker to continue current employment or a vocational training program. If the insurer or self-insured employer does not approve, the attending physician or the worker may request approval from the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services for such treatment. The director may order a medical review by a physician or panel of physicians pursuant to ORS 656.327 (3) to aid in the review of such treatment. The decision of the director is subject to review under ORS 656.704.

      (K) With the approval of the director, curative care arising from a generally recognized, nonexperimental advance in medical science since the worker’s claim was closed that is highly likely to improve the worker’s condition and that is otherwise justified by the circumstances of the claim. The decision of the director is subject to review under ORS 656.704.

      (L) Curative care provided to a worker to stabilize a temporary and acute waxing and waning of symptoms of the worker’s condition.

      (d) When the medically stationary date in a disabling claim is established by the insurer or self-insured employer and is not based on the findings of the attending physician, the insurer or self-insured employer is responsible for reimbursement to affected medical service providers for otherwise compensable services rendered until the insurer or self-insured employer provides written notice to the attending physician of the worker’s medically stationary status.

      (e) Except for services provided under a managed care contract, out-of-pocket expense reimbursement to receive care from the attending physician or nurse practitioner authorized to provide compensable medical services under this section shall not exceed the amount required to seek care from an appropriate nurse practitioner or attending physician of the same specialty who is in a medical community geographically closer to the worker’s home. For the purposes of this paragraph, all physicians and nurse practitioners within a metropolitan area are considered to be part of the same medical community.

      (2)(a) The worker may choose an attending doctor, physician or nurse practitioner within the State of Oregon. The worker may choose the initial attending physician or nurse practitioner and may subsequently change attending physician or nurse practitioner two times without approval from the director. If the worker thereafter selects another attending physician or nurse practitioner, the insurer or self-insured employer may require the director’s approval of the selection. The decision of the director is subject to review under ORS 656.704. The worker also may choose an attending doctor or physician in another country or in any state or territory or possession of the United States with the prior approval of the insurer or self-insured employer.

      (b) A medical service provider who is not a member of a managed care organization is subject to the following provisions:

      (A) A medical service provider who is not qualified to be an attending physician may provide compensable medical service to an injured worker for a period of 30 days from the date of the first visit on the initial claim or for 12 visits, whichever first occurs, without the authorization of an attending physician. Thereafter, medical service provided to an injured worker without the written authorization of an attending physician is not compensable.

      (B) A medical service provider who is not an attending physician cannot authorize the payment of temporary disability compensation. However, an emergency room physician who is not authorized to serve as an attending physician under ORS 656.005 (12)(c) may authorize temporary disability benefits for a maximum of 14 days. A medical service provider qualified to serve as an attending physician under ORS 656.005 (12)(b)(B) may authorize the payment of temporary disability compensation for a period not to exceed 30 days from the date of the first visit on the initial claim.

      (C) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, only a physician qualified to serve as an attending physician under ORS 656.005 (12)(b)(A) or (B)(i) who is serving as the attending physician at the time of claim closure may make findings regarding the worker’s impairment for the purpose of evaluating the worker’s disability.

      (D) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, a nurse practitioner licensed under ORS 678.375 to 678.390 or a physician associate licensed by the Oregon Medical Board in accordance with ORS 677.505 to 677.525 or a similarly licensed physician associate in any country or in any state, territory or possession of the United States:

      (i) May provide compensable medical services for 180 days from the date of the first visit on the initial claim;

      (ii) May authorize the payment of temporary disability benefits for a period not to exceed 180 days from the date of the first visit on the initial claim; and

      (iii) When an injured worker treating with a nurse practitioner or physician associate authorized to provide compensable services under this section becomes medically stationary within the 180-day period in which the nurse practitioner or physician associate is authorized to treat the injured worker, shall refer the injured worker to a physician qualified to be an attending physician as defined in ORS 656.005 for the purpose of making findings regarding the worker’s impairment for the purpose of evaluating the worker’s disability. If a worker returns to the nurse practitioner or physician associate after initial claim closure for evaluation of a possible worsening of the worker’s condition, the nurse practitioner or physician associate shall refer the worker to an attending physician and the insurer shall compensate the nurse practitioner or physician associate for the examination performed.

      (3) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the director, by rule, upon the advice of the committee created by ORS 656.794 and upon the advice of the professional licensing boards of practitioners affected by the rule, may exclude from compensability any medical treatment the director finds to be unscientific, unproven, outmoded or experimental. The decision of the director is subject to review under ORS 656.704.

      (4) Notwithstanding subsection (2)(a) of this section, when a self-insured employer or the insurer of an employer contracts with a managed care organization certified pursuant to ORS 656.260 for medical services required by this chapter to be provided to injured workers:

      (a) Those workers who are subject to the contract shall receive medical services in the manner prescribed in the contract. Workers subject to the contract include those who are receiving medical treatment for an accepted compensable injury or occupational disease, regardless of the date of injury or medically stationary status, on or after the effective date of the contract. If the managed care organization determines that the change in provider would be medically detrimental to the worker, the worker shall not become subject to the contract until the worker is found to be medically stationary, the worker changes physicians or nurse practitioners, or the managed care organization determines that the change in provider is no longer medically detrimental, whichever event first occurs. A worker becomes subject to the contract upon the worker’s receipt of actual notice of the worker’s enrollment in the managed care organization, or upon the third day after the notice was sent by regular mail by the insurer or self-insured employer, whichever event first occurs. A worker shall not be subject to a contract after it expires or terminates without renewal. A worker may continue to treat with the attending physician or nurse practitioner authorized to provide compensable medical services under this section under an expired or terminated managed care organization contract if the physician or nurse practitioner agrees to comply with the rules, terms and conditions regarding services performed under any subsequent managed care organization contract to which the worker is subject. A worker shall not be subject to a contract if the worker’s primary residence is more than 100 miles outside the managed care organization’s certified geographical area. Each such contract must comply with the certification standards provided in ORS 656.260. However, a worker may receive immediate emergency medical treatment that is compensable from a medical service provider who is not a member of the managed care organization. Insurers or self-insured employers who contract with a managed care organization for medical services shall give notice to the workers of eligible medical service providers and such other information regarding the contract and manner of receiving medical services as the director may prescribe. Notwithstanding any provision of law or rule to the contrary, a worker of a noncomplying employer is considered to be subject to a contract between the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation as a processing agent or the assigned claims agent and a managed care organization.

      (b)(A) For initial or aggravation claims filed after June 7, 1995, the insurer or self-insured employer may require an injured worker, on a case-by-case basis, immediately to receive medical services from the managed care organization.

      (B) If the insurer or self-insured employer gives notice that the worker is required to receive treatment from the managed care organization, the insurer or self-insured employer must guarantee that any reasonable and necessary services so received, that are not otherwise covered by health insurance, will be paid as provided in ORS 656.248, even if the claim is denied, until the worker receives actual notice of the denial or until three days after the denial is mailed, whichever event first occurs. The worker may elect to receive care from a primary care physician, nurse practitioner or physician associate authorized to provide compensable medical services under this section who agrees to the conditions of ORS 656.260 (4)(g). However, guarantee of payment is not required by the insurer or self-insured employer if this election is made.

      (C) If the insurer or self-insured employer does not give notice that the worker is required to receive treatment from the managed care organization, the insurer or self-insured employer is under no obligation to pay for services received by the worker unless the claim is later accepted.

      (D) If the claim is denied, the worker may receive medical services after the date of denial from sources other than the managed care organization until the denial is reversed. Reasonable and necessary medical services received from sources other than the managed care organization after the date of claim denial must be paid as provided in ORS 656.248 by the insurer or self-insured employer if the claim is finally determined to be compensable.

      (5)(a) A nurse practitioner, or a physician associate described in ORS 656.005 (12)(b)(C), who is not a member of the managed care organization is authorized to provide the same level of services as a primary care physician as established by ORS 656.260 (4) if the nurse practitioner or physician associate:

      (A) Maintains the worker’s medical records;

      (B) Has a documented history of treatment with the worker;

      (C) Agrees to refer the worker to the managed care organization for any specialized treatment, including physical therapy, to be furnished by another provider that the worker may require; and

      (D) Agrees to comply with all the rules, terms and conditions regarding services performed by the managed care organization.

      (b)(A) A nurse practitioner or physician associate authorized to provide medical services to a worker enrolled in the managed care organization may:

      (i) Provide medical treatment to the worker if the treatment is determined to be medically appropriate according to the service utilization review process of the managed care organization; and

      (ii) Authorize temporary disability payments as provided in subsection (2)(b)(D) of this section.

      (B) The managed care organization may also authorize the nurse practitioner or physician associate to provide medical services and authorize temporary disability payments beyond the periods established in subsection (2)(b)(D) of this section.

      (6) Subject to the provisions of ORS 656.704, if a claim for medical services is disapproved, the injured worker, insurer or self-insured employer may request administrative review by the director pursuant to ORS 656.260 or 656.327. [1965 c.285 §23; 1979 c.839 §32; 1981 c.535 §31; 1981 c.854 §14; 1985 c.739 §4; 1987 c.884 §24; 1990 c.2 §10; 1995 c.332 §25; amendments by 1995 c.332 §25a repealed by 1999 c.6 §1; 1999 c.6 §10; 1999 c.582 §12; 1999 c.868 §1; 1999 c.926 §1; 2003 c.811 §§3,4; 2005 c.26 §§3,4; 2007 c.252 §§3,4; 2007 c.270 §§2,3; 2007 c.365 §2a; 2007 c.505 §§3,4; 2009 c.32 §1; 2009 c.36 §1; 2013 c.179 §1; 2023 c.87 §1; 2024 c.73 §111]

 

      656.246 [Repealed by 1965 c.285 §95]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 288 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Mize v. Comcast Corp-AT & T Broadband, 145 P.3d 315 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mize v. Comcast Corp-AT & T Broadband, 145 P.3d 315 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 43× “Again, we have no authority to write a "more than minimal" standard into ORS 656.245 in the absence of some indication that such a standard was intended by the legislature.”
Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co. (In re Comp. of Garcia-Solis), 441 P.3d 573 (Or. 2019). · cites it 35× “245 (1)(a), which provides in part: "For every compensable injury, the insurer *** shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury ***." We begin our analysis by noting several questions that we are not required to address.”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 190 P.3d 443 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 60× “Board Member Langer suggested, "I respectfully submit, however, that the relationship between claimant's obesity and his compensable injury the court directed us to address on remand is irrevelant.”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 217 P.3d 644 (Or. 2009). · cites it 23× “) ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates those limits into the compensability of medical services claims by providing that, in the case of consequential and combined conditions, the insurer is responsible for only those medical services that are “directed to medical conditions caused in…”
SAIF Corp. v. Martinez, 182 P.3d 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 21× “, arthroscopic surgery, and claimant’s accepted claim to support the compensability of those services under ORS 656.245. They assert that the board erred in so determining, because the requested services in fact pertained to a condition not encompassed within the accepted claim…”
Arms v. SAIF Corp., 343 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 15× “Sprague, 346 Or 661, 664 , 217 P3d 644 (2009), stating that “ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates the limitations on compensability of preexisting conditions * * * that are provided in ORS 656.”
SAIF Corp. v. Swartz, 270 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 20× “The board determined that the surgery was compensable under ORS 656.245. Id. at 187-88 . On review, we affirmed, noting: “Significantly for purposes of this case, we said in Sprague that the word ‘conditions’ as used in ORS 656.”
Brown v. SAIF Corp., 391 P.3d 773 (Or. 2017). · cites it 4× “As we have noted, the workers’ compensation statutes expressly address the subject of the compensability of such medical services in ORS 656.245. This case does not involve that issue.”
Saif Corp. v. Allen, 881 P.2d 773 (Or. 1994). · cites it 8× “[4] On July 25, 1991, claimant filed a form Request for Hearing and checked the following boxes on the form: "REQUEST IS MADE FOR A HEARING CONCERNING ONE OR MORE OF THE REASONS CHECKED BELOW: "* * * * * "H X MEDICAL SERVICES ORS 656.245 "* * * * * "Q X OTHER—EXPLAIN AND CITE…”
Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. Watkins, 227 P.3d 1134 (Or. 2010). · cites it 6× “The CDA also stated that the CDA did not “limit [claimant’s] statutory medical rights pursuant to ORS 656.245” 1 and that *690 claimant “retain[ed] his right to medical services[.”
Reynaga v. Nw. Farm Bureau, 709 P.2d 1071 (Or. 1985). · cites it 17× “The issue in this case is whether ORS 656.245, a provision of Oregon’s Workers’ Compensation Laws, permits a compensation insurer to deny payment for treatment by all out-of-state chiropractors.”
SAIF Corp. v. Shipley, 955 P.2d 244 (Or. 1998). · cites it 9× “245 provides, in part: “(l)(a) For every compensable injury, the insurer or the self-insured employer shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury for such period as the nature of the injury or the process of the recovery…”
Show all 288 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1) — 77 cases
Mize v. Comcast Corp-AT & T Broadband, 145 P.3d 315 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “Again, we have no authority to write a "more than minimal" standard into ORS 656.245 in the absence of some indication that such a standard was intended by the legislature.”
McGarry v. State Accident Ins. Fund, 547 P.2d 654 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co. (In re Comp. of Garcia-Solis), 441 P.3d 573 (Or. 2019). “245 (1)(a), which provides in part: "For every compensable injury, the insurer *** shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury ***." We begin our analysis by noting several questions that we are not required to address.”
Drews v. EBI Companies, 795 P.2d 531 (Or. 1990).
Baar v. Fairview Training Ctr., 911 P.2d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(a) — 29 cases
Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co. (In re Comp. of Garcia-Solis), 441 P.3d 573 (Or. 2019). “245 (1)(a), which provides in part: "For every compensable injury, the insurer *** shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury ***." We begin our analysis by noting several questions that we are not required to address.”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 217 P.3d 644 (Or. 2009). “) ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates those limits into the compensability of medical services claims by providing that, in the case of consequential and combined conditions, the insurer is responsible for only those medical services that are “directed to medical conditions caused in…”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 190 P.3d 443 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “Board Member Langer suggested, "I respectfully submit, however, that the relationship between claimant's obesity and his compensable injury the court directed us to address on remand is irrevelant.”
SAIF Corp. v. Swartz, 270 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “The board determined that the surgery was compensable under ORS 656.245. Id. at 187-88 . On review, we affirmed, noting: “Significantly for purposes of this case, we said in Sprague that the word ‘conditions’ as used in ORS 656.”
Arms v. SAIF Corp., 343 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “Sprague, 346 Or 661, 664 , 217 P3d 644 (2009), stating that “ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates the limitations on compensability of preexisting conditions * * * that are provided in ORS 656.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(b) — 9 cases
Baar v. Fairview Training Ctr., 911 P.2d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Hathaway v. Health Future Enter., 884 P.2d 549 (Or. 1994).
Nicholson v. Salem Area Transit & Saif Corp., 884 P.2d 864 (Or. 1994).
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Morelli v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 395 P.3d 650 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c) — 6 cases
Baar v. Fairview Training Ctr., 911 P.2d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Hathaway v. Health Future Enter., 884 P.2d 549 (Or. 1994).
Hibbs v. Sedgwick CMS (A180280), 340 Or. App. 421 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(A) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Ross, 82 P.3d 1035 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(E) — 1 case
Edwards v. Cavenham Forest Indus., 492 P.3d 750 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(F) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(H) — 1 case
Saif Corp. v. Carlos-Macias (In re Comp. of Carlos-Macias), 418 P.3d 54 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(K) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(1)(c)(L) — 1 case
Lepage v. Rogue Valley Med. Ctr., 999 P.2d 533 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2) — 7 cases
Saif Corp. v. Allen, 881 P.2d 773 (Or. 1994). “[4] On July 25, 1991, claimant filed a form Request for Hearing and checked the following boxes on the form: "REQUEST IS MADE FOR A HEARING CONCERNING ONE OR MORE OF THE REASONS CHECKED BELOW: "* * * * * "H X MEDICAL SERVICES ORS 656.245 "* * * * * "Q X OTHER—EXPLAIN AND CITE…”
Comp. of Rivers v. State Accident Ins. Fund, 610 P.2d 288 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
Pyle v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 640 P.2d 680 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
Matter of Comp. of Smith, 634 P.2d 809 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
Mogliotti v. Reynolds Metals Co., 676 P.2d 919 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(C) — 1 case
Walker v. Providence Health Sys. Oregon, 340 P.3d 91 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(a) — 7 cases
Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. Vasquez, 938 P.2d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Orowheat-Bimbo Bakeries USA-BBU, Inc. v. Vargas, 401 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Country Mut. Ins. v. Mendoza, 939 P.2d 674 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Precision Castparts Corp - PCC Structurals v. Cramer, 514 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(b) — 1 case
Walker v. Providence Health Sys. Oregon, 340 P.3d 91 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(b)(A) — 1 case
Saif Corp. v. Jensen, 52 P.3d 1118 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(b)(B) — 9 cases
Hicks v. SAIF Corp., 100 P.3d 1129 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
Hicks v. SAIF Corp., 96 P.3d 856 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Atkins v. Allied Sys., Ltd., 29 P.3d 1139 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
Sisters of Providence v. McGuire, 52 P.3d 1113 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(2)(b)(C) — 8 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Walker v. Providence Health Sys. Oregon, 340 P.3d 91 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
Snyder v. SAIF Corp., 402 P.3d 743 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
Providence Health Sys. Oregon v. Walker, 344 P.3d 1115 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
Liberty Nw. Ins. v. Olvera-Chavez, 339 P.3d 928 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(3) — 11 cases
Kemp v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 672 P.2d 1343 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
Cook v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 758 P.2d 854 (Or. 1988).
Reynaga v. Nw. Farm Bureau, 709 P.2d 1071 (Or. 1985). “The issue in this case is whether ORS 656.245, a provision of Oregon’s Workers’ Compensation Laws, permits a compensation insurer to deny payment for treatment by all out-of-state chiropractors.”
Scheidemantel v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 683 P.2d 1028 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
Mogliotti v. Reynolds Metals Co., 676 P.2d 919 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(3)(a) — 1 case
Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. Vasquez, 938 P.2d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(3)(b)(A) — 1 case
ITT Hartford Ins. Grp. v. Nicholls, 871 P.2d 125 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(3)(b)(B) — 13 cases
Koitzsch v. Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp., 866 P.2d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
SAIF Corp. v. Owens, 270 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Altamirano v. Woodburn Nursery, Inc., 889 P.2d 1305 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
SAIF Corp. v. Christensen, 882 P.2d 125 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
Weckesser v. Jet Delivery Sys., 888 P.2d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4) — 6 cases
Thorpe v. Seige Logging, 838 P.2d 628 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Jahnke v. US West Commc'ns, 983 P.2d 1053 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Taylor v. Mill, 919 P.2d 527 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Saif Corp. v. Jensen, 52 P.3d 1118 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(a) — 4 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Orowheat-Bimbo Bakeries USA-BBU, Inc. v. Vargas, 401 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
Managed Healthcare Nw., Inc. v. Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs., 106 P.3d 624 (Or. 2005).
Back in Action Physical Therapy v. Liberty Nw. Ins., 316 P.3d 324 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(a)(D) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(b)(A) — 3 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
SAIF Corp. v. Cessnun, 984 P.2d 894 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Travelers Indem. of Illinois v. Curtis, 97 P.3d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(b)(B) — 1 case
Darling v. Johnson Controls Battery Grp., Inc., 70 P.3d 894 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(b)(D) — 5 cases
Orowheat-Bimbo Bakeries USA-BBU, Inc. v. Vargas, 401 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
Precision Castparts Corp - PCC Structurals v. Cramer, 514 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
Travelers Indem. of Illinois v. Curtis, 97 P.3d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
Saif Corp. v. Jensen, 52 P.3d 1118 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(4)(bXD) — 1 case
SAIF Corp. v. Reid, 982 P.2d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(5) — 1 case
Menasha Corp. v. Crawford, 29 P.3d 1129 (Or. 2001).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(6) — 11 cases
Icenhower v. SAIF Corp., 43 P.3d 431 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
SAIF Corp. v. Shipley, 955 P.2d 244 (Or. 1998). “245 provides, in part: “(l)(a) For every compensable injury, the insurer or the self-insured employer shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury for such period as the nature of the injury or the process of the recovery…”
Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. Watkins, 227 P.3d 1134 (Or. 2010). “The CDA also stated that the CDA did not “limit [claimant’s] statutory medical rights pursuant to ORS 656.245” 1 and that *690 claimant “retain[ed] his right to medical services[.”
Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Cornell, 939 P.2d 99 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
SAIF Corp. v. Bales, 360 P.3d 1281 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(a) — 1 case
InteliStaf Healthcare v. Daniels, 349 Or. App. 390 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l) — 1 case
Parmer v. Plaid Pantry 54, 709 P.2d 743 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(a) — 31 cases
Arms v. SAIF Corp., 343 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “Sprague, 346 Or 661, 664 , 217 P3d 644 (2009), stating that “ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates the limitations on compensability of preexisting conditions * * * that are provided in ORS 656.”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 217 P.3d 644 (Or. 2009). “) ORS 656.245(1)(a) incorporates those limits into the compensability of medical services claims by providing that, in the case of consequential and combined conditions, the insurer is responsible for only those medical services that are “directed to medical conditions caused in…”
SAIF Corp. v. Martinez, 182 P.3d 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “, arthroscopic surgery, and claimant’s accepted claim to support the compensability of those services under ORS 656.245. They assert that the board erred in so determining, because the requested services in fact pertained to a condition not encompassed within the accepted claim…”
SAIF Corp. v. Sprague, 190 P.3d 443 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “Board Member Langer suggested, "I respectfully submit, however, that the relationship between claimant's obesity and his compensable injury the court directed us to address on remand is irrevelant.”
SAIF Corp. v. Swartz, 270 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “The board determined that the surgery was compensable under ORS 656.245. Id. at 187-88 . On review, we affirmed, noting: “Significantly for purposes of this case, we said in Sprague that the word ‘conditions’ as used in ORS 656.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(b) — 11 cases
Hathaway v. Health Future Enter., 884 P.2d 549 (Or. 1994).
Hathaway v. Health Future Enter., 865 P.2d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
Baar v. Fairview Training Ctr., 911 P.2d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Cornell, 939 P.2d 99 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Sedgwick Claims Mgmt. Servs. v. Jones, 166 P.3d 547 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c) — 5 cases
AIG Claim Servs. Inc. v. Cole, 133 P.3d 357 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Rich, 144 P.3d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
Daugherty v. SAIF Corp., 310 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Landis v. Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp., 383 P.3d 349 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(D) — 1 case
Landis v. Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp., 383 P.3d 349 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(F) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(H) — 4 cases
SAIF Corp. v. Martinez, 182 P.3d 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “, arthroscopic surgery, and claimant’s accepted claim to support the compensability of those services under ORS 656.245. They assert that the board erred in so determining, because the requested services in fact pertained to a condition not encompassed within the accepted claim…”
SAIF Corp. v. Swartz, 270 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “The board determined that the surgery was compensable under ORS 656.245. Id. at 187-88 . On review, we affirmed, noting: “Significantly for purposes of this case, we said in Sprague that the word ‘conditions’ as used in ORS 656.”
Roseburg Forest Prods. v. Langley, 965 P.2d 477 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
Slater v. SAIF Corp., 400 P.3d 969 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(J) — 3 cases
Landis v. Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp., 383 P.3d 349 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
Jones v. Quimby Trucking, 909 P.2d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
Kenfield v. Health Future, Inc., 912 P.2d 414 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(K) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(c)(L) — 6 cases
SAIF Corp. v. January, 998 P.2d 1286 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Young v. Hermiston Good Samaritan, 194 P.3d 857 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
Port of Portland Ocip v. Cierniak, 142 P.3d 542 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
Lepage v. Rogue Valley Med. Ctr., 999 P.2d 533 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Liberty Nw. Ins. Corp. v. Kraft, 132 P.3d 60 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.245(l)(e)(E) — 1 case
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Rich, 144 P.3d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
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.