Editor’s comment: In our view the Appellate Court flew straight and true on this dispute. In Atanus v. American Airlines (No. 1-09-2380 June 18, 2010), the Appellate Court, First District affirmed the lower court’s dismissal. Plaintiff was injured while working for Defendant and another company. Plaintiff sued the airline and its employee for tortious interference with prospective business expectancy.

He alleged the airline and its manager made false statements that he committed workers’ compensation fraud to his other employer, an electric company for whom he worked as an engineer. Defendant Airline’s security investigator, upon learning Plaintiff’s work hours at O’Hare overlapped, obtained a copy of the O’Hare gate entry records and provided a copy to electric company. Upon reviewing the records, the electric company boldly terminated him.

The Circuit and later Appellate Court ruled there was no unjustified interference by the airline in providing this copy, which was a proper and accurate business record. The Court majority reasoned it was reasonable one employer would request such a record from the other.

As Plaintiff necessarily alleged transmittal of false information by Defendant airline, he must establish this allegation of false transmittal to survive the summary judgment. As he couldn’t, the claim was dismissed. We applaud the hard work of the folks at American Airlines in not backing down.

We do feel the Illinois judiciary may be getting on the WC-fraud-by-injured-worker bandwagon a little bit. We have also heard of several recent criminal prosecutions across the state. If you need a workers’ compensation fraud poster for your workplace, please send a reply. We appreciate your thoughts and comments.

Post Provided by Gene Keefe of Keefe, Campbell & Associates, LLC. The firm was started by 
Eugene F. Keefe, Michael J. Danielewicz, John P. 
Campbell, Joseph R. Needham and Shawn R. Biery with 
the goal of providing high-quality and cost-effective 
civil litigation services for the defense of 
self-insured employers and insurance carriers.

On July 6, 2010, emergency rules took effect that change the reimbursement method for implants and add accredited Ambulatory Surgical Care Facilities
(ASCFs) to the ASTC fee schedule.  The Commission filed the emergency rules with the Illinois Secretary of State for publication in the Illinois
Register. Simultaneously, the Commission filed the same language to go through the normal rule-making process.

The amendment makes two changes to Section 7110.90:

1. It changes the reimbursement method for medical implants from 65% of normal charge to 25% over the manufacturer’s invoice price less rebates,
plus actual and customary shipping costs incurred for the implant.

2. It provides that Ambulatory Surgical Care Facilities (ASCFs) accredited by AAAASF, JCAHO, AAAHC are eligible for reimbursement under the ASTC fee
schedule. Previously, the rule said the ASTC fee schedule applied only to Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers licensed by the Illinois Department of Public Health.

Treatment on or after 7/6/10 should be paid according to these new rules.

Comments about the amendment should be submitted in writing by August 30 to:

Darrell Widen
Assistant General Counsel
Illinois Workers¹ Compensation Commission
8-281 JRTC
100 W. Randolph St.
Chicago, IL 60601
312-814-8770
darrell.widen@illinois.gov

To view the emergency rules, go HERE.

As you may recall, Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission Panel B upheld denial of benefits determined by the Arbitrator based upon an injury which occurred at an employer sponsored charity bowling event. See previous post here.

Paul Coghlan, from Paul A. Coghlan & Associates, P.C., was kind enough to inform us that the commission has been reversed (on May 27th, 2010) by the Circuit Court of Cook County. To read the full decision, go here.

Paul represented the petitioner in this case and can be reached at 630.887.2922 or by email at pcoghlan (at) pcpclaw (dot) com.

Editor’s comment: We were told current Illinois Governor Pat Quinn was a reformer. He has started a number of reform initiatives and actually called for a change to the Illinois constitution mandating what people in other parts of the country call “ethics”—most Illinois politicians don’t understand or use that term much.

What happened at the Workers’ Compensation Commission last week was the same sort of secret, clandestine and under-the-cover shenanigans we have grown so used to from past administrations. We knew Paul Rink; he was a former Commissioner who appeared to have been gently nudged out several months ago. We have been awaiting his successor and now he has been appointed. You may all note the vacancy was not filled with a publicized national or even state-wide search for the best possible candidate—we don’t do things that way in this poorly-run state. Everything is closely guarded, like it is a nuclear secret and if the news gets out about what they do filling a state job, the sky might fall.

Last week, Governor Pat Quinn appointed Daniel R. Donohoo as a Commissioner. You may note the Commissioners sit as administrative appeal officers—there are nine of them. While they haven’t completely figured it out just yet, Commissioner Donohoo may fill the “public” member seat on Panel B and be the swing vote between the labor Commissioner, Barbara Sherman and the employer representative, Kevin Lamborn. Please note they may scramble the three panels but they will be certain to insure two members vote for labor and the management member gets to file lots of dissents.

The Commission has advised new Commissioner Donohoo holds a B.S. degree in Business Administration from Southern Illinois University and a J.D. degree from Thomas M. Cooley Law School. He served as the Madison County Recorder of Deeds for 21 years and operated his own accounting firm for 17 years.

We want everyone to note we don’t know and have never met Commissioner Donohoo. He may turn out to be the best administrative appeal officer in Illinois history. To our knowledge, he isn’t going to fill the bill on what some folks feel would represent “diversity.” From our research, we assure our readers he:

• Doesn’t have any formal workers’ comp training
• Doesn’t have a workers’ compensation litigation background
• Isn’t an associate or partner at a workers’ comp petitioner or defense firm
• Has never, ever handled a litigated workers’ compensation claim that we can find on the web or elsewhere.

Our research indicates new Commissioner Donohoo graduated from Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Michigan exactly two years ago today on May 17, 2008. We are fairly confident they don’t have a class or even a seminar on Illinois workers’ compensation law and practice in Lansing, MI. The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission’s website indicates he was licensed to practice law in Illinois November 6, 2008. That is about eighteen months ago, so while he may be a veteran deed-recorder and accountant, he is a complete newbie as a work comp lawyer.

We ask all of our readers, why would they hire someone with absolutely no WC experience to a top-level state job? Whose brother’s-cousin’s-uncle do you have to know to get the nod on that sort of work?

Well from the outside, looking in, we assume Mr. Donohoo is part of the Madison County Insiders—he was the Madison County Recorder of Deeds for more than two decades. He is probably already eligible for a state/county pension when he reaches the right age. If you aren’t aware of it, Madison County is a small, mostly rural county in southern Illinois across the Mighty Mississippi River from St. Louis. Madison County has been repeatedly designated as a “judicial hellhole” for their approach to litigation that comes to this tiny county from all over the United States. Every month for years on end, little Madison County, IL with a population of about 140,000 has a monthly asbestos trial call of about 400 pages—if all those claims were to be tried in a given year, most adults in that county would be on indefinite jury duty. If you ever get to visit the county seat of Edwardsville, you may see what has to be the biggest rural county courthouse in the history of our planet—the place was fully funded with about $90 millions dollars derived from the interest on an appellate bond in the amount of about $600 million dollars on a tobacco verdict later tossed out by the Illinois Supreme Court.

How did Madison County get so prominent in Illinois WC circles? Well, if you go back down memory lane about nine years to 2001-2, our current former-Governor-about-to-be-tried-on-June-3 was locked in a very close three-way primary election battle with Paul Vallas and our current junior U.S. Senator Roland Burris. Rumors are the former Governor made a deal with the Madison County Plaintiffs’ bar that gave him the political edge to win the primary and then the general election. As part of that bargain, we understand the former Governor turned over substantial control of the then-named Illinois Industrial Commission to the Madison County Insiders who quietly changed the name, funding and make-up of the place into a shiny new not-very-diverse Plaintiff-Petitioner-dominated place that has been anathema to Illinois business ever since.

We want to make it clear, the folks brought to the Commission by this group are both honest and outwardly professional and many of them were and are very knowledgeable and ostensibly qualified. We are amazed to see someone move into a second-tier job that completely lacks any true WC background and wonder why he wasn’t started out as staff attorney for a Commissioner to then become an arbitrator and continue to move up. With that in mind, we caution we have no idea, absolutely none, how new Commissioner Donohoo will rule when cases are brought before him. We assume he will learn very rapidly on the job. When he needs help, he can ask the covert, hidden, undisclosed players-not-to-be-named-ever who got him the job. And the observers from Illinois business will continue to sigh and wait for the fall election to see how things go.

And please, everyone remember, the State of Illinois under Pat Quinn still ain’t ready for reform. A vote for Bill Brady will be a vote for jobs to grow and stay in this state.

Post Provided by Gene Keefe of Keefe, Campbell & Associates, LLC. The firm was started by 
Eugene F. Keefe, Michael J. Danielewicz, John P. 
Campbell, Joseph R. Needham and Shawn R. Biery with 
the goal of providing high-quality and cost-effective 
civil litigation services for the defense of 
self-insured employers and insurance carriers.

Governor Pat Quinn has appointed Daniel Donohoo as commissioner.

Commissioner Donohoo holds a B.S. degree in Business Administration from Southern lllinois University, and a J.D. degree from Cooley Law School. He served as the Madison County Recorder of Deeds for 21 years, and operated his own accounting firm for 17 years.

After completing the legally-required training, Commissioner Donohoo will be assigned a panel and hearing sites.

Daniel resigned as the Madison County Recorder of Deeds on January 31st, 2010.

From an article earlier this year:

EDWARDSVILLE – Madison County Recorder of Deeds Dan Donohoo said Friday he is resigning as of Jan. 31, and added that he has a lot of people to thank for his 21 years in office.

“Today, I am not looking for votes, but instead, giving a vote of thanks,” he said in his resignation letter.

Donohoo served four years as a County Board member before he was elected recorder.

He thanked his staff, family, other officeholders and friends.

He said he has learned much during his time in office, such as the importance of committed employees.

Apparently, he also can be thankful that he has kept his sense of humor.

“I have also learned from my fellow officeholder, Madison County Auditor Rick Faccin, that the only thing you should ever lie awake at night worrying about is not county government or the Recorder’s Office, but whether or not the Cardinals will finish in first place.

For the rest of the story from The Telegraph about Daniel Donohoo’s resignation, please click here.

Synopsis: A federal grand jury has indicted an Illinois chiropractor and a physician, Darwin Minnis, D.C., and Jacob Salomon, M.D. for defrauding the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Program by materially false and fraudulent means.

Editor’s comment: Two Illinois healthcare givers, Dr. Salomon and Chiro Minnis, the latter of which owns Spine and Joint Rehabilitation Center in Maywood, IL, have been indicted on federal health care fraud charges. Each count carries a maximum of 10 years in prison and a $250,000.00 fine. The indictment was announced in March 2010 by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney. We note a brief Westlaw search under Illinois Workers’ Compensation Cases and Administrative Decisions produced numerous “hits” for both Dr. Minnis and Dr. Salomon.

In Unites States v. Darwin Minnis, Jacob Salomon, and Gary Strauss, 10 CR 0193, Unites States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, the federal government accuses Dr. Minnis, Dr. Salomon, and “biller” Gary Strauss of submitting false claims which total more than one million dollars. The false claims were submitted to obtain payments from workers’ compensation and other insurance companies for services which were either not provided or for inflated claims for provided services. The alleged scheme took place from 2000 through 2007.

According to the 18 count indictment, Dr. Minnis forged the signatures of other physicians on documents which falsely represented treatment had been ordered or supervised. The indictment alleges Dr. Minnis committed these forgeries as he knew the federal workers’ compensation program would not accept a chiropractor’s opinions or reports as medical evidence to support workers’ compensation claims. Further, Dr. Minnis is accused of double-billing workers’ compensation providers for disability examinations.

In addition, the indictment alleges Dr. Salomon signed false documents which made it appear he or other physicians had treated certain patients when no treatment had been provided. Dr. Salomon and Dr. Minnis then prepared false progress notes and fee sheets.

Post Provided by Gene Keefe of Keefe, Campbell & Associates, LLC. The firm was started by 
Eugene F. Keefe, Michael J. Danielewicz, John P. 
Campbell, Joseph R. Needham and Shawn R. Biery with 
the goal of providing high-quality and cost-effective 
civil litigation services for the defense of 
self-insured employers and insurance carriers.

Synopsis: Commission “strikes” down a bowling injury, “sparing” the employer from paying WC benefits and sending the claim into the “gutter.” Kudos to the Commission and this veteran Arbitrator for following the law as written.

Editor’s comment: In Cramer v Viacom Outdoor  2009 WL 3807341 (Ill.Indus.Com’n), Commission Panel B upheld denial of benefits determined by the Arbitrator based upon an injury which occurred at an employer sponsored charity bowling event. The pertinent facts noted the event occurred during the afternoon hours of what was otherwise a normal business day. The employees including Petitioner worked the earlier part of that day in the office up until 1:30 PM when they departed for the event at a local bowling alley. The employees were paid regular wages for the time they attended the event and if they didn’t attend, the office manager testified they would have been paid regular wages but would have been required to attend to regular office duties.

While bowling, Petitioner sustained a comminuted fracture of the articular surface of left distal radius and a comminuted fracture of the left humeral neck along with a tear of the left supraspinatus. She underwent an open reduction with internal fixation of hardware to repair the radius fractures. As a result she has lost significant range of motion in both the wrist and shoulder joints.

Even though Petitioner testified she felt “pressured” to attend the event the claim was denied. We note she did not testify that she was ordered or assigned to attend the event, as the statute would require for injuries to be compensable. The employer’s witness who was their Human Resources manager testified employees were not ordered or assigned to attend the event. While language in notice of event strongly encouraged everyone to participate, it provided employees not wishing to participate will be required to work their normal day. Employees were asked to advise whether or not they would be participating. Each participant was required to make a minimum $15.00 donation. However, the company promised to pay for the bowling and shoe rental.

The basis for the denial is the exclusionary language found in Section 11 of the Act. The relevant portion of Section 11 reads as follows: “Accidental injuries incurred while participating in voluntary recreational programs including but not limited to athletic events, parties and picnics do not arise out of and in the course of the employment even though the employer pays some or all of the cost thereof. This exclusion shall not apply in the event that the injured employee was ordered or assigned by his employer to participate in the program.”

Another key fact was an attendance record showing ten of the 36 employee staff (27%) did not sign up to attend the event, although they did make a donation and there was no evidence presented that any of the employees who did not attend the event were disciplined or discriminated against in any way by the company.

This case is a good example of an Arbitrator who heard all of the evidence and determined all appeared to be credible, but noted the language of the Act and the overwhelming facts in the matter did not support compensability under the Illinois WC Act. Respondents can also take away the lesson that good investigation and presentation of evidence still is an effective method of defending claims with actual defenses.

Post Provided by Gene Keefe of Keefe, Campbell & Associates, LLC. The firm was started by 
Eugene F. Keefe, Michael J. Danielewicz, John P. 
Campbell, Joseph R. Needham and Shawn R. Biery with 
the goal of providing high-quality and cost-effective 
civil litigation services for the defense of 
self-insured employers and insurance carriers.

Illinois: Study finds medical costs per claim high, but growth slowing

Medical costs per workers’ compensation claim in Illinois were among the highest of 15 study states one year after the implementation of its first medical fee schedule in 2006. However, the Workers Compensation Research Institute found that growth in medical costs per claim slowed to 5 percent in 2007 claims evaluated in 2008 after double-digit growth rates before the fee schedule.

The study by the Cambridge, Mass.-based organization also found that indemnity benefits per claim with more than seven days of lost time in Illinois grew 7 percent in 2007 claims evaluated in 2008 — the same rate as previous years. Researchers attributed the steady growth in indemnity benefits per claim in 2007 to a 6 percent increase in the duration of temporary disability and a 5 percent increase in the average permanent partial disability/lump-sum payment per PPD/lump-sum claim.

Read the entire story at Risk & Insurance Online.

CHICAGO, March 24, 2010 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ —-Seven Illinois companies have been honored with the first annual WOWIE Award, sponsored by The Illinois State Council of the Society for Human Resource Management (ISC-SHRM) and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois (BCBSIL). The WOWIE award recognizes employers who champion the health of their employees and strive to create a work culture that promotes physical activity.

Applications were divided into two categories: “Companies with More than 200 Employees,” and “Companies with Fewer Than 200 Employees.” Three awards were given in each of the following categories: Platinum, Gold and Silver.

Recipients include:

Companies with More Than 200 Employees

Platinum: City of St. Charles Wellness Program and Team, St. Charles, Ill.

Gold: City of Highland Park, Ill.

Silver: TRW Automotive, Marshall, Ill.

Companies with Fewer Than 200 Employees

Platinum: Robinson Engineering, South Holland, Ill.

Gold: DISTek Integrations, Carthage, Ill.

Silver: Lafarge Joppa, Grand Chain, Ill.

Silver: Alper Services LLC, Chicago

The City of St. Charles Wellness Program received a Platinum Award in the “More than 200 Employees” category, in part, because it was able to incent employees to adopt healthy behaviors in exchange for lower health care premiums.

The city’s program consisted of three goals: encouraging healthy lifestyles among employees, reducing health care costs for the city and providing an opportunity for employees to decrease their health insurance premiums by achieving one or more of six health goals:

• blood pressure less than 130/85
• LDL cholesterol less than 130
• weight/BMI within normal limits based on a physician certified chart
• cardiovascular exercise for 30 minutes at least three times a week
• being tobacco free
• completing the online Blue Cross and Blue Shield health risk assessment

Additionally, the city established a “Wellness Team,” comprising employees in several departments to communicate about health and wellness topics using the employee newsletter, payroll stuffers, email, the company’s human resources blog and materials available in the company library. The city also holds an annual employee health fair.

Results of their comprehensive commitment to employee wellness have been impressive so far, according to Brian Townsend, St. Charles city administrator.

“Sixty-one percent of employees surveyed said they started an exercise program and 62 percent started to eat healthier food because of Wellness Team initiatives,” he said. “The city further revealed that its wellness initiatives reduced the number of sick days per employee by 16 percent; reduced hospital admissions by 26 percent, reduced workers compensation costs by 75 percent and reduced health care costs 12 percent per employee.”

South Holland, Ill.-based Robinson Engineering received a Platinum Award in the “200 Employees or Fewer” category with its “Robinson Employee Wellness program,” which was established in 2007.

The Robinson’s Employee Wellness Program provides a wide spectrum of health information and services, from monthly health topics to employee health fairs that all seek to improve employee health. The program consisted of:

• quarterly lunch and learns on health and nutrition topics
• walking clinics
• group activities such as ping pong and employee competitions
• subsidizing health club memberships
• healthy food choices at lunch meetings
• health potluck meetings, ‘Fruit Fridays” and “Healthy Snack Day”
• pedometer challenges
• CPR/first aide classes

Robinson also hosts annual health screenings and flu shot clinics.

Overall, Robinson has seen dramatic increases in participation and health results in the three years since it began the program.

According to Robinson CEO Chris King, 99 percent of employees participated in the health screenings in the program’s first year, which the company believes led to an overall 73% improvement in cholesterol levels among its workforce. More importantly, King said the commitment to employee health helped the company realize a 10 to 1 return on its investment in terms of improved employee productivity and reduced health care costs.

“More and more employers and human resources professionals have come to realize that employee wellness programs are excellent ways to promote positive health care behaviors and create more productive workers and employees,” said John Jorgensen, president of ISC-SHRM.

“These companies have reduced health care costs, increased participation in their wellness programs and improved their employee’s health,” said Dieter Freer, senior vice president, Illinois Market Segments, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois (BCBSIL). “Truly, these winning companies have hit a grand slam in executing employee wellness programs, and I look forward to presenting them with their awards in August.”

Winners will be honored at the ISC-SHRM annual meeting this August in Oak Brook, Ill.

Sponsored by BCBSIL, ISC-SHRM developed an Website focused on employee wellness programs. Called “WOW” or “Wellness in our Workplace,” the site provides information to human resources professionals who are interested in developing and offering employee wellness programs.

About ISC-SHRM

The Illinois State Council of the Society for Human Resource Management (ISC-SHRM) is dedicated to serving the needs of SHRM chapters in Illinois by representation to SHRM and assistance in achieving each SHRM Illinois chapter’s highest potential. ISC-SHRM promotes professionalism in human resources and adds value to the SHRM membership. The ISC-SHRM Board is made up of volunteer representatives across Illinois who serve to advance the human resources profession.

Our purpose is to support over 12,800 human resources professionals in Illinois who are either members of SHRM Illinois chapters or members of SHRM by providing timely and relevant information, ongoing professional development opportunities and intra-state communication regarding issues of interest in the field of human resources.

For more information, visit ISC-SHRM on the web at www.illinoisshrm.org.

About Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois

With more than 7 million members, BCBSIL, a division of Health Care Service Corporation, a Mutual Legal Reserve Company, is the largest health insurance company in Illinois. Started in 1936, BCBSIL is committed to promoting the health and wellness of its members and its communities through accessible, cost-effective, quality health care. BCBSIL is an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.

SOURCE Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois – Health Care

Copyright (C) 2010 PR Newswire. All rights reserved

Synopsis: Only in Illinois: a chiropractor is now a “physician” as defined in a Supreme Court ruling and our 1987 Medical Practice Act.

Editor’s comment: In Montes v. Mai (No. 1-08-2774, 2010 WL 682445 1st Dist, Feb 2010), the Appellate Court reviewed a claim in which Plaintiff Montes, a passenger in an automobile, was injured when the car driven by Defendant struck an auto Montes was riding in. Montes brought a civil action against the other driver Mai. During the course of the litigation, Defendant Mai issued a subpoena to Plaintiff Montes’ treating chiropractor to testify at a discovery deposition. A dispute arose as to the amount of the fee, if any, to be paid to the chiropractor for attendance at a discovery deposition.

The chiropractor wanted to be paid $550 per hour, paid in advance, with a 2 hour minimum. At one point, Defendant’s attorney offered $300.00 per hour with no minimum payment or prepayment. This offer was refused and the matter brought before the assigned judge. Circuit Court Judge Kathleen Flanagan then set an hourly fee of $66.95 and held the chiropractor in contempt of court for refusing to appear and testify at the deposition. The chiropractor appealed.

On appeal, Defendant contended a chiropractor was not a physician under Supreme Court Rule 204(c) and therefore only a subpoena with a $20.00 witness fee and mileage need be paid to the chiropractor to compel his appearance at the discovery deposition.

In considering Judge Flanagan’s ruling, the Appellate Court first examined Supreme Court Rule 204(c) and did not find any Illinois case law defining the term “physician” as used in this rule. The reviewing court then used the definition of the word “physician” as found in Illinois case law dating back to 1917, as well as the current version of the Medical Practice Act of 1987 to find the term “physician” as used in Rule 204(c) is intended to encompass a treating chiropractor. Therefore under Rule 204(c), a chiropractor is entitled to “a reasonable fee” for time spent in a discovery deposition in a case which he or she is not a party and not just a $20.00 witness fee and mileage.

The Appellate Court ruled that although the trial court’s formula for determining the reasonable fee was not the only way to calculate a reasonable fee, they affirmed the trial court’s calculations of the chiropractor’s hourly fee at $66.95 per hour. The reviewing court also affirmed the trial court’s order stating Defendant was not required to pay a 2 hour minimum or prepay the fee. This portion of the ruling was based on the committee comments to Rule 204(c), which explain the fee should be paid only after the doctor has testified, and the fee should not exceed an amount which reasonably reimburses the doctor for the time actually spent testifying at the deposition. The Court felt the trial court’s order properly reflected the Supreme Court’s intended application of the rule and reasonably compensated the chiropractor for the time spent testifying.

The question then becomes, does this case affect either a chiropractor or a physician’s deposition in a workers’ compensation case? The answer is “sort of.”

Obviously, Supreme Court Rule 204(c) which is applicable to discovery depositions does not apply to workers’ compensation because there are no discovery depositions in the WC rules. However, the rationale behind this decision is well thought out and reasonable. In that regard, the reasoning of the Court may likely be applied to the similar dispute in a worker’s compensation case if the evidence deposition of a chiropractor is needed.

Additionally, one of the paragraphs of Section 16, provides in relevant part,

The Commission shall have the power to determine the reasonableness and fix the amount of any fee of compensation charged by any person, including attorneys, physicians, surgeons and hospitals, for any service performed in connection with this Act, or for which payment is to be made under this Act or rendered in securing any right under this Act.

While this paragraph is not as detailed or explicit as Supreme Court Rule 204(c) is, it has the same intent. This paragraph allows the Commission or assigned arbitrator to determine the reasonableness of a doctor’s or chiropractor’s deposition fee. Under the “reasonable standard” of this paragraph, it would also seem that this paragraph would allow an arbitrator to deny or allow payment of a minimum hourly requirement, as well as to deny or allow prepayment of the deposition fee.

This article was written by Keefe, Campbell & Associates most recent addition, John C. Wilson, J.D. Please do not hesitate to reply or direct thoughts and comments to John at jwilson@keefe-law.com.

Post Provided by Gene Keefe of Keefe, Campbell & Associates, LLC. The firm was started by 
Eugene F. Keefe, Michael J. Danielewicz, John P. 
Campbell, Joseph R. Needham and Shawn R. Biery with 
the goal of providing high-quality and cost-effective 
civil litigation services for the defense of 
self-insured employers and insurance carriers.