Home/Case Law/JOHN NOTTINGHAM vs. 911 DESIGN, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.
Regular DecisionReconsideration

JOHN NOTTINGHAM vs. 911 DESIGN, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.

Filed: Feb 10, 2011
San Francisco
ADJ2798524 (SBR 0296412)

CompFox AI Summary

This case involves a lien claimant, Arrowback Medical Group (AMG), seeking reconsideration after their lien for medical treatment was disallowed. The underlying workers' compensation case was resolved by a Compromise and Release (C&R) approved on March 28, 2002, which made the applicant responsible for all future medical expenses. AMG argued they were denied due process because they were not served with the C&R or the Order Approving C&R (OACR). The Board denied reconsideration, finding that all disputed medical services occurred after the C&R was approved, and the OACR clearly placed responsibility for future medical costs on the applicant.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

This case involves a lien claimant, Arrowback Medical Group (AMG), seeking reconsideration after their lien for medical treatment was disallowed. The underlying workers' compensation case was resolved by a Compromise and Release (C&R) approved on March 28, 2002, which made the applicant responsible for all future medical expenses. AMG argued they were denied due process because they were not served with the C&R or the Order Approving C&R (OACR). The Board denied reconsideration, finding that all disputed medical services occurred after the C&R was approved, and the OACR clearly placed responsibility for future medical costs on the applicant.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

JOHN NOTTINGHAM vs. 911 DESIGN, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. (2011) – San Francisco | CompFox