What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration denied.
Defendant filed a petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's Partial Findings of Fact, Award & Order dated December 6, 2023, which the WCAB panel reviewed and denied.
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
Medical treatment / UR / IMRApplicant prevailedlumbar spine
The parties had a binding stipulation to submit the homecare issue to the agreed medical evaluator, Dr. Falkinstein, whose report supported the need for homecare services, and the defendant's attempt to narrow the scope of the agreement was rejected as unreasonable.
From the decision · page 3INTRODUCTION: On December 21, 2023, the Defendant, by and through its attorney of record, CW Law, LLP, filed a timely and verified petition for reconsideration dated December 21, 2023, alleging that the undersigned WCJ erred in his Partial Findings of Fact, Award & Order dated December 6, 2023. The Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in construing in his decision-making the parties'[] deferring to Yuri Falkinstein, M.D., the agreed medical evaluator in orthopedics, the Applicant's further need for home healthcare in the minutes of hearing by WCJ Clint Feddersen dated November 1, 2021.