Heilman v. Vocational Rehabilitation Division
This text of 8 Ct. Cl. 88 (Heilman v. Vocational Rehabilitation Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This claim is for professional services rendered by the claimants, Doctors Heilman, Anderson and Abplanalp, to a client of the respondent Vocational Rehabilitation Division. The claimants were given an oral authorization, but due to an oversight of the respondent, a written authorization was not submitted and the claimants’ invoice was not processed.
The 'answer of the respondent admits the allegations of the notice of claim, and, urging equity and good conscience, requests that the claim in the amount of $116.50 be paid.
[89]*89Accordingly, we award the claimants, Elwood H. Heilman, M. D., Randolph L. Anderson, M.D., and Arthur A. Abplanalp, M.D., the sum of $116.50.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Ct. Cl. 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heilman-v-vocational-rehabilitation-division-wvctcl-1970.