656.254
Medical report forms; penalties and other sanctions; procedure for declaring
health care practitioner ineligible for workers’ compensation reimbursement. (1) The Director of the Department
of Consumer and Business Services shall establish medical report forms, in
duplicate snap-outs where applicable, to be used by insurers, self-insured
employers and physicians, including in such forms information necessary to
establish facts required in the determination of the claim.
(2) The director
shall establish sanctions for the enforcement of medical reporting
requirements. Such sanctions may include, but are not limited to, forfeiture of
fees and penalty not to exceed $1,000 for each occurrence.
(3) If the
director finds that a health care practitioner has:
(a) Been found,
pursuant to ORS 656.327, to have failed to comply with rules adopted pursuant
to this chapter regarding the performance of medical services for injured
workers or to have provided medical treatment that is excessive, inappropriate
or ineffectual, the director may impose a sanction that includes forfeiture of
fees and a penalty not to exceed $1,000 for each occurrence. If the failure to
comply or perform is repeated and willful, the director may declare the health
care practitioner ineligible for reimbursement for treating workers’
compensation claimants for a period not to exceed three years.
(b) Had the
health care practitioner’s license revoked or suspended by the practitioner’s
professional licensing board for a violation of that profession’s ethical
standards, the director may declare the health care practitioner ineligible for
reimbursement for treating workers’ compensation claimants for a period not to
exceed three years or the period the practitioner’s license is suspended or
revoked, whichever period is the longer.
(c) Engaged in
any course of conduct demonstrated to be dangerous to the health or safety of a
workers’ compensation claimant, the director may impose a sanction that
includes forfeiture of fees and a penalty not to exceed $1,000 for each
occurrence. If the conduct is repeated and willful, the director may declare
the health care practitioner ineligible for reimbursement for treating workers’
compensation claimants for a period not to exceed three years.
(4) Any
declaration that a health care practitioner is ineligible to receive
reimbursement under this chapter shall not otherwise interfere with or impair
treatment of any person by the health care practitioner.
(5) ORS 656.735
(4) to (6) and 656.740 also apply to orders and penalties assessed under this
section. [1967 c.626 §§3,4; 1975 c.556 §40; 1979 c.839 §30; 1981 c.854 §15;
1987 c.233 §1; 1987 c.884 §27; 1995 c.94 §2; 1997 c.249 §200; 2003 c.170 §12;
2005 c.26 §7]
Notes of Decisions
Martin v. City of Albany, 880 P.2d 926 (Or. 1994).
· cites it 7× “In that bill, the legislature also enacted ORS 656.254(3) to authorize the director to impose sanctions against health care practitioners for providing inappropriate medical treatment, suffering a license revocation or suspension for violation of professional ethical standards,…”
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991).
· cites it 6× “[6] ORS 656.254 was enacted as part of the same bill that enacted ORS 656.”
Kemp v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 677 P.2d 725 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“A second problem with the rule, which was implied in our opinion, is that it imposes a direct penalty against physicians which we held was not within the statutory authorization.”
Gill v. Dir. of the Dep't of Ins. & Fin., 813 P.2d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “ORS 656.254(3). 1 We reverse. On July, 8, 1988, the Oregon State Board of Chiropractic Examiners (Board) issued to petitioner a Notice of Proposed Revocation or Suspension of Chiropractic License.”
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“7 See ORS 656.254(l)(c)(F); ORS 656.236(1) (providing that a CDA “resolves all matters and all rights to compensation, attorneys fees and penalties potentially arising out of claims, except medical services, regardless of the conditions stated in the agreement” (emphasis…”
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“245(1)(c)(K) authorizes a medically stationary worker, with the approval of the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services, to receive "curative care arising from a generally recognized, nonexperimental advance in medical science since the worker's claim was…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(1) — 1 case
Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991).
“[6] ORS 656.254 was enacted as part of the same bill that enacted ORS 656.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(1)(c)(F) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“245(1)(c)(K) authorizes a medically stationary worker, with the approval of the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services, to receive "curative care arising from a generally recognized, nonexperimental advance in medical science since the worker's claim was…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(2) — 1 case
Kemp v. Workers' Comp. Dep't, 677 P.2d 725 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“A second problem with the rule, which was implied in our opinion, is that it imposes a direct penalty against physicians which we held was not within the statutory authorization.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(3) — 2 cases
Martin v. City of Albany, 880 P.2d 926 (Or. 1994).
“In that bill, the legislature also enacted ORS 656.254(3) to authorize the director to impose sanctions against health care practitioners for providing inappropriate medical treatment, suffering a license revocation or suspension for violation of professional ethical standards,…”
Gill v. Dir. of the Dep't of Ins. & Fin., 813 P.2d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
“ORS 656.254(3). 1 We reverse. On July, 8, 1988, the Oregon State Board of Chiropractic Examiners (Board) issued to petitioner a Notice of Proposed Revocation or Suspension of Chiropractic License.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(3)(a) — 1 case
Martin v. City of Albany, 880 P.2d 926 (Or. 1994).
“In that bill, the legislature also enacted ORS 656.254(3) to authorize the director to impose sanctions against health care practitioners for providing inappropriate medical treatment, suffering a license revocation or suspension for violation of professional ethical standards,…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(3)(b) — 1 case
Gill v. Dir. of the Dep't of Ins. & Fin., 813 P.2d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
“ORS 656.254(3). 1 We reverse. On July, 8, 1988, the Oregon State Board of Chiropractic Examiners (Board) issued to petitioner a Notice of Proposed Revocation or Suspension of Chiropractic License.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 656.254(l)(c)(F) — 1 case
Basin Tire Serv., Inc. v. Minyard, 249 P.3d 127 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“7 See ORS 656.254(l)(c)(F); ORS 656.236(1) (providing that a CDA “resolves all matters and all rights to compensation, attorneys fees and penalties potentially arising out of claims, except medical services, regardless of the conditions stated in the agreement” (emphasis…”
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.