CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to disallow Dr. Konstat's medical-legal reports, arguing they were unreasonable due to a settled psyche claim under Thomas v. Sports Chalet and failed to meet specific reporting requirements. The Board found that the settlement agreement implicitly acknowledged the value of Dr. Konstat's reports, and the cited statutes and regulations did not preclude their reimbursement as reasonable medical-legal expenses. Furthermore, the Board noted Dr. Konstat's reports were admitted into evidence without objection.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant sought to disallow Dr. Konstat's medical-legal reports, arguing they were unreasonable due to a settled psyche claim under Thomas v. Sports Chalet and failed to meet specific reporting requirements. The Board found that the settlement agreement implicitly acknowledged the value of Dr. Konstat's reports, and the cited statutes and regulations did not preclude their reimbursement as reasonable medical-legal expenses. Furthermore, the Board noted Dr. Konstat's reports were admitted into evidence without objection.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.