CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dr. Nachman Brautbar's petition for reconsideration regarding the disallowance of his lien. The Board affirmed the finding that Dr. Brautbar failed to meet his evidentiary burden to prove the reasonableness and necessity of his services, and that he was not the applicant's treating physician. The Board clarified that lien claimants, like defendants, must prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence, and reliance on outdated case law like Keifer is misplaced due to legislative amendments. Furthermore, Dr. Brautbar's failure to appear at conferences and present evidence on raised issues, coupled with procedural errors in his petition, supported the denial.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dr. Nachman Brautbar's petition for reconsideration regarding the disallowance of his lien. The Board affirmed the finding that Dr. Brautbar failed to meet his evidentiary burden to prove the reasonableness and necessity of his services, and that he was not the applicant's treating physician. The Board clarified that lien claimants, like defendants, must prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence, and reliance on outdated case law like Keifer is misplaced due to legislative amendments. Furthermore, Dr. Brautbar's failure to appear at conferences and present evidence on raised issues, coupled with procedural errors in his petition, supported the denial.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.