CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a lien claimant's appeal challenging the disallowance of psychiatric treatment costs. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the original decision, finding the applicant did not meet the six-month actual work requirement under Labor Code section 3208.3(d) for psychiatric injury claims. The applicant's extensive absences due to an admitted orthopedic injury meant he did not perform six months of actual service. The WCAB clarified that this six-month threshold applies even to psychiatric injuries stemming from admitted physical injuries. The lien claimant's arguments regarding detrimental reliance and the necessity of treatment for the orthopedic injury were also rejected.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a lien claimant's appeal challenging the disallowance of psychiatric treatment costs. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) affirmed the original decision, finding the applicant did not meet the six-month actual work requirement under Labor Code section 3208.3(d) for psychiatric injury claims. The applicant's extensive absences due to an admitted orthopedic injury meant he did not perform six months of actual service. The WCAB clarified that this six-month threshold applies even to psychiatric injuries stemming from admitted physical injuries. The lien claimant's arguments regarding detrimental reliance and the necessity of treatment for the orthopedic injury were also rejected.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.