Required medical examination
- worker-requested examination
- qualified physicians
- claimant’s duty to reduce disability
- suspension or reduction of benefits
- cessation or reduction of temporary total disability benefits
- rules
- penalties
Source:
Section 656.325 — Required medical examination; worker-requested examination; qualified physicians; claimant’s duty to reduce disability; suspension or reduction of benefits; cessation or reduction of temporary total disability benefits; rules; penalties, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors656.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Since licensed clinical psychologist is not doctor or physician, claimant had no duty to submit to psychological examination to determine whether or not his disease was occupational and compensable. Frey v. Willamette Ind., Inc., 13 Or App 449, 509 P2d 861 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
Where, on original claim, court held that employee’s refusal to undergo myelogram and possible resulting surgery was reasonable, employee’s refusal to submit to myelography did not bar recovery for aggravation of initial injury. Waldroup v. J. C. Penney Company, 30 Or App 443, 567 P2d 576 (1977)
Refusal to submit to medical treatment is not absolute bar to recovery, but is factor considered in determining what treatment is “reasonably essential” Waldroup v. J. C. Penney Company, 30 Or App 443, 567 P2d 576 (1977)
Where appeal period has run, insurer may seek redetermination of award where there is available medical or other evidence that injured worker’s condition has improved. Bentley v. SAIF, 38 Or App 473, 590 P2d 746 (1979)
Injured party has duty to mitigate damages and therefore downrating of claimant’s disability to reflect failure to lose excess weight was proper. Nelson v. EBI Companies, 64 Or App 16, 666 P2d 1360 (1983), aff’d 296 Or 246, 674 P2d 596 (1984)
Claimant may not be denied benefits for reasonable refusal of treatment essential to promote recovery. Reef v. Willamette Industries, 65 Or App 366, 671 P2d 1197 (1983), Sup Ct review denied
Because temporary benefits are compensation for loss of wages, worker suffering aggravation after retirement does not qualify. Cutright v. Weyerhaeuser, 299 Or 290, 702 P2d 403 (1985)
Where claimant suffers aggravation while in workforce, claimant is entitled to temporary total disability benefits until medically stationary and released for work even though claimant voluntarily withdraws from workforce prior to closure of claim. Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Kepford, 100 Or App 410, 786 P2d 745 (1990), Sup Ct review denied
Insurer may seek board review of director’s order re-examining award of permanent total disability. Lehman v. SAIF, 107 Or App 207, 811 P2d 924 (1991)
Injury incurred during compelled medical examination requested by employer is analyzed as independent work-related injury, not consequence of original compensable injury. Robinson v. Nabisco, Inc., 331 Or 178, 11 P3d 1286 (2000)
Worker “entitled to receive compensation” includes worker whose claim has been denied and who is pursuing challenge to denial. Darling v. Johnson Controls Battery Group, Inc., 188 Or App 190, 70 P3d 894 (2003), Sup Ct review denied
Whether employer has written policy of offering modified work to injured workers is determined as of time physician approves modified job that would have been offered to worker, not time of worker injury. Morales v. SAIF, 196 Or App 693, 103 P3d 654 (2004), aff’d 339 Or 574, 124 P3d 1233 (2005)
Requirement that employer cease payment of temporary total disability benefits under specified circumstances applies to both initial and aggravation claims. Morales v. SAIF, 196 Or App 693, 103 P3d 654 (2004), aff’d 339 Or 574, 124 P3d 1233 (2005)
Suspension sanction for claimant failure to cooperate with insurer medical examination prevents using failure as basis for denying claim under ORS 656.262. Lewis v. CIGNA Insurance Co., 339 Or 342, 121 P3d 1128 (2005)
Where worker is terminated following return to modified employment, requirement to pay temporary total disability benefits until attending physician approves modified employment does not apply. SAIF v. Vivanco, 216 Or App 210, 173 P3d 160 (2007)
Attorney General Opinions
Workers’ Compensation Board’s authority to order payment of claimant’s attorney fees, (1978) Vol 38, p 2069