|
All Contested Case Subject
Settlement
In General
A stipulation agreement bars claimant's ability to pursue sanctions. Lahti, Marvin,
7 CCHR 225 (2002).
CDA and DCS
A claimant was not entitled to reimbursement for treatment for conditions which claimant stated in DCS had been resolved and would not require future treatment. Roberson, Henry,
16 CCHR 349 (2011).
It was not error to dismiss claimant's request for hearing on the denial of eligibility for vocational services where claimant knowingly waived his right to receive vocational assistance in a claim disposition agreement. Turnbow, Matthew O.,
15 CCHR 93 (2010).
The disputed claims settlement could not operate as a satisfaction of the doctor's claims because the doctor was not a party to the agreement, and there is no evidence that the doctor agreed to a discharge of the claimed $6,300 debt by payment of $1,800. Patterson, David A,
13 CCHR 276 (2008).
As a practical and legal matter, the effect of a CDA on claimant's claim is to continue claimant's right to medical benefits as if the claim remained compensable, even though all other benefits pertaining to a compensable claim may be settled and resolved. McKay, Dan L,
12 CCHR 296 (2007).
When a CDA maintains rights to medical services benefits under ORS 656.245, it is not an error of law for MRU to apply the MCO provisions of ORS 656.245 to claimant's request for benefits. McKay, Dan L,
12 CCHR 296 (2007).
A worker is not eligible for vocational assistance when the worker refuses an offer of suitable employment ( employment for which the worker has the necessary physical capacities/abilities and if employment is "permanent") from the employer at the time of injury. Jorgens, Judith A*,
12 CCHR 41 (2007).
A CDA does not dispose of attorney fees awarded in medical treatment disputes under ORS 656.385. Watkins, John L*,
11 CCHR 195 (2006).
|
