CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the prior award of medical care. The Board adopted the judge's report which found the defendant's arguments regarding causation and utilization review (UR) to be unsupported by evidence. The judge admonished defendant's counsel for misstating the record and noted that the defendant failed to provide a clear basis for disputing causation or denying injury benefits within the required timeframes.
Ernest Millette vs. 81 Grand Holdings, Inc., dba California Rehabilitation, Illinois Midwest Insurance Agency, LLC on behalf of PROCENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY is a workers' compensation case decided in San Jose. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in San Jose.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the prior award of medical care. The Board adopted the judge's report which found the defendant's arguments regarding causation and utilization review (UR) to be unsupported by evidence. The judge admonished defendant's counsel for misstating the record and noted that the defendant failed to provide a clear basis for disputing causation or denying injury benefits within the required timeframes.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.