Gabriela Medina, vs. Innovative Facility Services; Gallagher Bassett Elk Grove,

: This case involves a dispute between lien claimant, Arthur Malkin, D.C., and applicant, Gabriela Medina, regarding the disallowance of a lien claim for workers' compensation benefits. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration and rescinded the Joint Findings and Order issued July 27, 2009, returning the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision which includes evidence of applicant's actual date of termination or layoff and a finding regarding applicant's date of termination or layoff based upon substantial evidence.

INNOVATIVE FACILITY SERVICES; GALLAGHER BASSETT ELK GROVE, GABRIELA MEDINA, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGABRIELA MEDINA, Applicant,vs.INNOVATIVE FACILITY SERVICES; GALLAGHER BASSETT ELK GROVE, Defendant(s).Case Nos. ADJ717785 (MON 0357270)ADJ2210479 (MON 0357271)ADJ4156131 (MON 0357272)ADJ2088727 (MON 0357273)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Lien claimant, Arthur Malkin, D.C., seeks reconsideration of the Joint Findings and Order issued July 27, 2009, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant did not sustain any compensable industrial injury as set forth in claim numbers MON 0357270, MON 0357271, MON 0357272, MON 0357273, because they were post- termination filings barred by Labor Code section 3600(a)(10). The WCJ also ordered that the lien claim of Arthur Malkin, D.C. was disallowed.            In the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report), the WCJ noted at page 3:       “[E]ven if the employer knew about the injury on January 10,       2008, that would have been after Applicant had been terminated on       January 7, 2008. The evidence indicates that, as soon as she was       informed that she was terminated, Applicant went the same day to       an attorney and to a chiropractor to initiate four separate injury       claims. Labor Code section 3600(a)(10) was enacted precisely to       remedy such retaliatory claims. The workers’ compensation judge       properly held that the entirety of Chiropractor Malkin’s billing       should be disallowed as services provided in conjunction with       post-termination claims.”            Lien claimant contends that the WCJ erred by disallowing the lien arguing: (1) that the WCJ wrongfully found that applicant’s claim was a post-termination claim subject to Labor Code , section 3600(a)(10); and (2) that the employer’s actions were inconsistent with actual ter

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.