CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns Dr. Svastits' lien claim for medical treatment provided to the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Dr. Svastits' petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision. The WCJ awarded payment only for the new patient consultation and evaluations between July 10, 2008, and September 17, 2011, finding other treatments inconsistent with ACOEM Guidelines. Dr. Svastits' argument that lack of utilization review excused his burden of proof was rejected, as lien claimants must independently prove treatment reasonableness and necessity, consistent with guidelines.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns Dr. Svastits' lien claim for medical treatment provided to the applicant. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Dr. Svastits' petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision. The WCJ awarded payment only for the new patient consultation and evaluations between July 10, 2008, and September 17, 2011, finding other treatments inconsistent with ACOEM Guidelines. Dr. Svastits' argument that lack of utilization review excused his burden of proof was rejected, as lien claimants must independently prove treatment reasonableness and necessity, consistent with guidelines.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.