Case Name: In the Matter of the Compensation of Pamela J. Panek, Claimant. Pamela J. PANEK, Petitioner, v. OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES UNIVERSITY and SAIF Corporation, Respondents
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1993-10-06
Citations: 123 Or. App. 623
Docket Number: WCB 91-11126; CA A76255
Parties: In the Matter of the Compensation of Pamela J. Panek, Claimant. Pamela J. PANEK, Petitioner, v. OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES UNIVERSITY and SAIF Corporation, Respondents.
Judges: Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 123
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted May 14,
reversed and remanded in part; otherwise affirmed October 6,
reconsideration denied December 15, 1993, petition for review pending 1994
In the Matter of the Compensation of Pamela J. Panek, Claimant. Pamela J. PANEK, Petitioner, v. OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES UNIVERSITY and SAIF Corporation, Respondents.
(WCB 91-11126; CA A76255)
861 P2d 358
Kevin Keaney, Portland, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Pozzi, Wilson, Atchison, O’Leary & Conboy, Portland.
Steve Cotton, Special Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Claimant seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Board reversing the referee's decision ordering SAIF to pay for claimant's home-health care and awarding claimant an attorney fee under ORS 656.382(1). In the light of our decision in Meyers v. Darigold, Inc., 123 Or App 217, 861 P2d 352 (1993), in which we held that the Board has jurisdiction to consider medical treatment disputes if no party has requested that the Director of the Department of Insurance and Finance resolve the dispute, we reverse and remand the case to the Board for it to consider the merits of the compensability of the home-health care.
Claimant also contends that the Board erred in affirming the referee's decision that the proper rate of reimbursement for claimant's treatment team is a dispute concerning medical fees that is within the jurisdiction of the Director, rather than a matter concerning a claim, within the jurisdiction of the Board. We agree with the Board that the question is within the jurisdiction of the Director. ORS 656.704(3); ORS 656.248(13); see Haynes v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 75 Or App 262, 706 P2d 567, rev den 300 Or 332 (1985).
Reversed and remanded for consideration of com-pensability of home-health care; otherwise affirmed.