On October 26th, 2017 by Jesse Melendrez

Temporary Disability Where Diagnostics Denied

Posted In:
Case Law Updates | Temporary Disability Benefits

In many cases, an evaluating doctor, AME or Panel QME will require diagnostics to be completed before being able to determine the degree of injury or whether an injured worker is at Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI). Some insurers will deny authorization for these necessary diagnostics, delay to stall the claim and try to starve an Applicant of resources to encourage a lower settlement.

It is important that an injured worker know his/her rights in situations like these. Recently, the WCAB has held that where an insurer refuses to authorize the diagnostics required by the evaluator, the injured worker may still be entitled to temporary disability benefits, also referred to as lost wages. Pribyl v. Acosta Sales and Marketing, 2017 Cal. Work Comp PD Lexis 350.

While this ruling is not binding in other workers' compensation claims, it provides some insight into how the WCAB may rule in other similar matters.

On October 3rd, 2017 by Jesse Melendrez

Bodam: A UR Not Communicated Timely Is A UR Not Timely At All

Posted In:
Case Law Updates

The WCAB has issued an opinion supplementing the Court's prior opinion in Dubon, that a Utilization Review (UR) decision to deny medical treatment must be communicated to the required parties (ie. treating physician, injured worker etc.) within the required time frame or it will be deemed untimely. Bodam v. San Bernardino County (2014) 79 Cal. Comp. Cases 1519.

This means that if an insurer timely completes a UR denial for the treatment requested by an injured worker's treating physician, it still must be communicated to the physician and injured worker within the required timeframes. If the UR is not timely, then the UR is invalid pursuant to Dubon and the injured worker may pursue an order from the WCAB that the treatment be authorized.

It should be noted that this opinion has been designated as a significant panel decision. Therefore, even though it is not binding on lower courts, it is does provide a strong indication as to how the WCAB will decide this particular issue.

On October 2nd, 2017 by Jesse Melendrez

Navarro: New Injury, New Panel QME

Posted In:
Case Law Updates

The Court, in an en banc decision, held that where an injured worker sustains a new work related injury, he/she is not required to return to the same AME and/or QME's that were utilized to evaluate the prior injury. Navarro v. City of Montebello (2015, Appeals Board en banc) 79 Cal. Comp. Cases 418.

When the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decides a case en banc, it becomes binding on the lower workers' compensation courts. While the Court's holding in Navarro does not mean an injured worker is entitled to a different AME or Panel QME for every date of injury they sustain, it does mean that an injured worker is not forever shackled to the same one for subsequent distinct injuries.

Many insurers attempt to preclude an injured worker from asserting this right to reduce the potential compensation due for an injury, an injured worker is usually wise to assert this right where applicable.

HomeAboutBlogContactPrivacy PolicyJesse.Melendrez@MelendrezLaw.com
T: 949-328-7600          F: 949-954-7822
4695 MacArthur Court 11th Floor
Newport Beach, Orange County , CA 92660
9.6Jesse Melendrez
The information on this website is for general information and educational purposes only. It is based on general legal principles which can vary between jurisdictions which may not apply to the particular facts of your case. Nothing on this website should be construed as legal advice.

This website is intended solely for the use of people that live in California. The information on this website is in no way meant to solicit or otherwise offer services in any jurisdiction that our attorneys are not licensed to practice law in.

The information in this website is not intended, nor does receiving it, constitute an attorney client relationship.

The testimonials or endorsements on this website do not constitute any guarantee, warranty or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter.

© Copyright 2017 - Law Office of Jesse Melendrez APC - All Rights Reserved