News and Insights

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur sit amet sem id nisi porta rutrum.

Maria Rosenda Munoz vs. Taiko Foods, Inc. And Tokio Marine and Nichido Fire Insurance

Taiko Foods, Inc. And Tokio Marine And Nichido Fire Insurance Maria Rosenda Munoz WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAMARIA ROSENDA MUNOZ, Applicant,vs.TAIKO FOODS, INC. and TOKIO MARINE AND NICHIDO FIRE INSURANCE, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ2326195OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION            Lien claimant Mark L. Duell, Sr, D.C. (hereafter “lien claimant” or “petitioner”), seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact and Order issued by a workers compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on June 7, 2010. wherein the WCJ found that applicant, while employed as a kitchen worker on January 25, 2005, sustained admitted industrial injury’ to her cervical and lumbar spine. As relevant here, the WCJ further found that petitioner had not established prima facie case of entitlement to additional payment for chiropractic treatments (including nerve conduction studies and supplies), work conditioning and acupuncture during the period from February 10, 2005 through May 5, 2005. The WCJ further found that lien claimant had been paid the sum of $5.832.89 for approximately 42 dates of service and that the additional payment sought by petitioner was in the amount of S5,096.31 for another 26 dates of service. Applicant’s underlying claim was resolved by way of Compromise and Release in the amount of $15,000.00. which was approved on August 30, 2006.            ,            Lien claimant contends that the WCJ erred in ordering that lien claimant take nothing on its lien where the Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME), Todd Anderson, D.C., opined that lien claimant’s treatment was reasonable and necessary, and his report, which was served on petitioner at the time of trial, constitutes substantial evidence on which the WCJ should have relied. Petitioner further argues that the repons of Alan Moelleken, M.D., during lien claimant’s treatment , from February 10, 2005 through May 5, 2005, note that applicant repo

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Get exclusive access to in-debt interviews.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor.

Recent Article

Recent Article

Share Article

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *