CompFox AI Summary
This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of a disallowed lien for medical equipment. The Appeals Board found the WCJ erred in disallowing the lien solely because the equipment was provided before authorization. The Board remanded the case for further proceedings to address unresolved factual and legal issues regarding the utilization review process, the role of the prescribing physician, and compliance with procedural rules for requesting authorization. The Board emphasized that "retrospective review" is permitted under Labor Code section 4610(g)(1).
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves a lien claimant seeking reconsideration of a disallowed lien for medical equipment. The Appeals Board found the WCJ erred in disallowing the lien solely because the equipment was provided before authorization. The Board remanded the case for further proceedings to address unresolved factual and legal issues regarding the utilization review process, the role of the prescribing physician, and compliance with procedural rules for requesting authorization. The Board emphasized that "retrospective review" is permitted under Labor Code section 4610(g)(1).
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.