CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ4673406 (ANA 0403334) ADJ4233924 (ANA 0376527)
Regular
Sep 29, 2009

Joseph Vella vs. Hitchcock Automotive, State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case concerns a dispute over the reasonableness of a lien claimant's billing for outpatient surgery services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the original award, finding the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by concluding the lien claimant met its burden based solely on its usual billing practices without a proper analysis of reasonableness. The Board remanded the case to the ALJ to determine a reasonable fee considering all evidence, including the lien claimant's and defendant's submissions, as outlined in *Kunz* and *Tapia*. The decision emphasizes that the lien claimant bears the affirmative burden to prove the reasonableness of its fee.

Kunz doctrinelien claimantreasonable feerebuttal evidenceTapiabillingmedical treatmentoutpatient surgeryinpatient hospitalDRG
References
Case No. FRE 0222651
Regular
Jul 15, 2008

CHRISTOPHER HUNT vs. MADERA COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that limited a lien claimant's facility fees to the Official Medical Fee Schedule. The Board found the WCJ erred by not applying the correct *Kunz* standard for determining the reasonableness of outpatient surgery facility fees, which considers factors beyond the fee schedule. The case is remanded for further proceedings to properly develop the record according to *Kunz*.

KunzOfficial Medical Fee Scheduleoutpatient surgery facility feeslien claimantreconsiderationen banc decisionreasonableness of feesusual feegeographical areacontractually negotiated fees
References
Case No. LAO 0807776
Regular
Jan 08, 2008

Mason Dow vs. COMMERCIAL INTERIOR RESOURCES, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award, returning the case to the trial level for further proceedings. The Board found that the Administrative Law Judge erred by improperly applying the Official Medical Fee Schedule to a lien claimant's surgical facility fees incurred prior to its adoption. The case is remanded for the judge to determine the reasonableness of the lien claimant's charges, considering factors outlined in *Kunz v. Patterson Floor Coverings*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantReconsiderationFindings and AwardSurgical Facility FeesKunz v. Patterson Floor CoveringsReasonable FeeOfficial Medical Fee Schedule (OMFS)Outpatient Surgery CenterUsual Fee
References
Case No. LAO 0832662
Regular
Mar 18, 2008

RIVALDO CASTILLO vs. BENTLEY-SIMONSON, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, remanding the case to the trial level. The WCJ erred by applying the Official Medical Fee Schedule to a 2003 surgery and failing to consider the *Kunz* factors for reasonableness when determining the lien claimant's facility fees. The Board will allow the WCJ to determine the reasonableness of the lien claimant's charges under *Kunz*, with the OMFS as one factor.

Wilshire SurgicenterOpinion and Order Granting ReconsiderationFindings and AwardLien ClaimantOutpatient Surgery Facility FeesOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleKunz v. Patterson Floor CoveringLabor Code section 4600Reasonableness of Facility FeeUsual Fee
References
Case No. ADJ2367528 (SFO 0509283)
Regular
Mar 22, 2011

GUILLERMO BAYLEY vs. YMCA OF THE EAST BAY, TRAVELERS INSURANCE

This case involves a dispute over the payment for a 15-day hospitalization for an industrial injury. Stanford University Medical Center, a lien claimant, sought additional payment beyond the amount calculated under the Official Medical Fee Schedule (OMFS). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 9792(c) allows for fees exceeding the OMFS if extraordinary circumstances related to the unusual nature of services rendered are proven. The case was returned to the trial level for further development of evidence regarding these extraordinary circumstances and to determine if the claimed fee is reasonable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantReconsiderationInpatient Hospital Fee ScheduleOfficial Medical Fee Schedule (OMFS)Extraordinary CircumstancesDiagnosis-Related Group (DRG)Reasonable FeeLabor CodeMedical Treatment
References
Case No. ADJ3 176427 (AHM 0148942)
Regular
Feb 03, 2016

GILBERT LUNA vs. NATIONWIDE PHARMACY, LIBERTY MUTUAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a prior decision finding that Nationwide Pharmacy and Liberty Mutual's payment of $52,481.40 for spinal surgery was reasonable. Lien claimant Monrovia Memorial Hospital sought reconsideration, arguing a higher fee was warranted and they were exempt from the Official Medical Fee Schedule. However, the Board found that while the hospital was exempt from the fee schedule, it still had the burden to prove the reasonableness of its charges. The lien claimant failed to meet this evidentiary burden by a preponderance of the evidence.

Monrovia Memorial HospitalLien claimantOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleOMFS exemptionReasonable feeUsual and customary reimbursementBurden of proofFacility feesLong term care hospitalTitle 42 Code of Regulations
References
Case No. ADJ10348591 ADJ10349019
Regular
Jan 07, 2019

MIGUEL VELAZQUEZ, SERVANDO VELAZQUEZ vs. ARTEMIO ARCE, SOLOMON MARTINEZ

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding a prior finding that liens for interpreting services were not barred by AD rule 9792.5.5. This rule, requiring a second review request for fee schedule disputes, did not apply because the interpreter services were not subject to an applicable fee schedule at the time of service. Therefore, the lien claimant's failure to request a second review did not preclude the WCAB from adjudicating the lien dispute. The Board reasoned that AD rule 9792.5.5 and associated statutes only mandate the second review process for disputes concerning amounts under an "applicable fee schedule."

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAD Rule 9792.5.5Official Medical Fee ScheduleIndependent Bill ReviewExplanation of ReviewLabor Code section 4603.2Senate Bill 863Threshold IssueFee Schedule DisputeInterpreter Services
References
Case No. ADJ2340102 (LAO 0751270) ADJ4406096 (LAO 0784412)
Regular
Apr 27, 2017

JOSE MORFIN vs. WHITE MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, ADVENTIST HEALTH

This case involves an award of additional attorney's fees for applicant's counsel in the California Court of Appeal. The court remanded the matter for supplemental fees after the defendant's unsuccessful Petition for Writ of Review. While applicant's attorney sought $11,480.00 in fees, the Board found this excessive and awarded $8,000.00 based on a review of the appellate work and the contentious history of the litigation. The Board also awarded the requested costs of $67.58, totaling $8,067.58 in additional appellate attorney's fees and costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSupplemental Attorney's FeesPetition for Writ of ReviewLabor Code § 5801Labor Code § 5811Appellate Attorney's FeesItemization of Attorney's FeesExcessive Fee RequestReasonable Fee DeterminationCase-by-Case Basis
References
Case No. OXN 0129630, OXN 0129631
Regular
Jul 09, 2007

LUPE HERRERA vs. WAL-MART, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board award regarding industrial injuries to the applicant's right knee and wrist. They argued the administrative law judge improperly applied a 2004 fee schedule to services rendered prior to its effective date and misapplied burdens of proof. The Board denied reconsideration, finding the ALJ used the 2004 fee schedule as a reasonable guide, not as a strictly applicable regulation for pre-2004 services, and that their petition was timely.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien claimantsPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardIndustrial injuryRight kneeRight wristFee scheduleAmbulatory surgery centersBurden of proof
References
Case No. SDO 313688
Regular
May 06, 2008

CRESENCIO BARRERA vs. HNR FRAMING, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior decision because the administrative law judge (WCJ) failed to apply the *Kunz* standard for determining reasonable facility fees for medical services. The WCJ's decision was found to be internally inconsistent and unsupported by the evidence, particularly regarding the consideration of contractually negotiated rates and usual fees accepted by other providers. The case is remanded for further proceedings and a new decision by a different WCJ.

WCABReconsiderationFacility FeesCPT CodesReasonablenessKunz v. PattersonAmbulatory Surgery CenterMedicareOfficial Medical Fee ScheduleGeographical Area
References
Showing 1-10 of 3,210 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational