CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming its prior decision. The Board found that the defendant was not newly aggrieved by the amended decision, which clarified the obligation to provide treatment in Sweden or arrange transportation to the US for treatment. The Court reiterated that successive petitions for reconsideration are generally not permitted unless based on new evidence, which was not presented here. Therefore, the defendant's arguments regarding jurisdiction, reasonableness of transportation, utilization review, and due process were deemed unpersuasive and addressed by the existing order.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming its prior decision. The Board found that the defendant was not newly aggrieved by the amended decision, which clarified the obligation to provide treatment in Sweden or arrange transportation to the US for treatment. The Court reiterated that successive petitions for reconsideration are generally not permitted unless based on new evidence, which was not presented here. Therefore, the defendant's arguments regarding jurisdiction, reasonableness of transportation, utilization review, and due process were deemed unpersuasive and addressed by the existing order.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.