Wash. Rev. Code » Title 51 · Chapter 51.36
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 51.36.060 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
*** CHANGE IN 2026 *** (SEE 2405-S.SL) ***
Attending providers under this title shall comply with rules and regulations adopted by the director, and shall make such reports as may be requested by the department or self-insurer upon the condition or treatment of any such worker, or upon any other matters concerning such workers in their care. Except under RCW 49.17.210 and 49.17.250, all medical information in the possession or control of any person and relevant to the particular injury in the opinion of the department pertaining to any worker whose injury or occupational disease is the basis of a claim under this title shall be made available at any stage of the proceedings to the employer, the claimant's representative, and the department upon request, and no person shall incur any legal liability by reason of releasing such information.
[ 2023 c 171 s 11; 2004 c 65 s 12; 1991 c 89 s 3; 1989 c 12 s 17; 1975 1st ex.s. c 224 s 15; 1971 ex.s. c 289 s 53.]

Notes:

Effective date—Retroactive application—2023 c 171: See note following RCW 51.04.050.
Report to legislature—Effective date—Severability—2004 c 65: See notes following RCW 51.04.030.
Effective date—1975 1st ex.s. c 224: See note following RCW 51.04.110.
Effective dates—Severability—1971 ex.s. c 289: See RCW 51.98.060 and 51.98.070.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1999–2009 · leading case: Holbrook v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 822 P.2d 271 (Wash. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Holbrook v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 822 P.2d 271 (Wash. 2003). · cites it 18× “Former RCW 51.36.060 imposes a duty on physicians to release medical information and protects physicians from liability for wrongful disclosure: Physicians examining or attending injured workers under this title shall comply with rules and regulations adopted by the director,…”
Mayer v. Huesner, 107 P.3d 152 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “Mayer waived her right to patient confidentiality and privacy by putting her health at issue in both her workers' compensation claim under RCW 51.36.060 and her return to work effort under her collective bargaining agreement.”
Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Kantor, 973 P.2d 30 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “*773 Pursuant to the foregoing statutes, L&I promulgated “medical aid rules,” WAC 296-20, with which “[pjhysicians examining or attending injured workers” under the Act must comply, RCW 51.36.060. All fees for services provided to covered workers must comply with L&I regulations.”
Shafer v. Dep't, 213 P.3d 591 (Wash. 2009). “For instance, the physician is required to inform the injured worker of his or her rights under the IIA and lend assistance in filing a claim. RCW 51.28.020(1)(b). Physicians are also required to follow rules and regulations adopted by the Department as well as provide reports…”
Shafer v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 166 Wash. 2d 710 (Wash. 2009). “For instance, the physician is required to inform the injured worker of his or her rights under the IIA and lend assistance in filing a claim. RCW 51.28.020(1)(b). Physicians are also required to follow rules and regulations adopted by the Department as well as provide reports…”
Mayer v. Huesner, 126 Wash. App. 114 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “Mayer waived her right to patient confidentiality and privacy by putting her health at issue in both her workers’ compensation claim under RCW 51.36.060 and her return to work effort under her collective bargaining agreement.”
Shafer v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 159 P.3d 473 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “shall inform the injured worker of his or her rights under this title and lend all necessary assistance in making this application for compensation and such proof of other matters as required by the rules of the department without charge to the worker."). [20] Id.”
Shafer v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 140 Wash. App. 1 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “020(l)(b). RCW 51.28.020(2)(a) (“If the application required by this section is .”
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.