CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a lien claimant, E&M Interpreting, seeking payment for alleged interpretation services during the applicant's medical treatment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's decision that E&M failed to meet its burden of proof. Specifically, E&M did not demonstrate the qualifications of its interpreters or the necessity of the services provided. The Board affirmed that lien claimants must prove both the reasonableness and necessity of services, as well as the qualifications of the individuals providing them, to be entitled to payment.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a lien claimant, E&M Interpreting, seeking payment for alleged interpretation services during the applicant's medical treatment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's decision that E&M failed to meet its burden of proof. Specifically, E&M did not demonstrate the qualifications of its interpreters or the necessity of the services provided. The Board affirmed that lien claimants must prove both the reasonableness and necessity of services, as well as the qualifications of the individuals providing them, to be entitled to payment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.