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.
The WCJ initially found the lien claimant's services valid and awarded reimbursement, but the WCAB rescinded that decision and approved a settlement stipulation resolving the claim with payment.
From the decision · page 1Defendant Technology Insurance Company petitions for reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on August 7, 2024. In that decision, the WCJ found, in pertinent part, that lien claimant Darrell Burstein, M.D. performed valid medical-legal services on or about June 2, 2020, and August 12, 2021, and awarded Dr. Burstein reimbursement for those services along with penalty and interest. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding defendant liable for payment to lien claimant.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Lien claimant Darrell Burstein, M.D. performed valid medical-legal services on or about June 2, 2020, and August 12, 2021.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This fact supported the WCJ's initial finding of valid services and reimbursement award.
From the decision · page 1Defendant Technology Insurance Company petitions for reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on August 7, 2024. In that decision, the WCJ found, in pertinent part, that lien claimant Darrell Burstein, M.D. performed valid medical-legal services on or about June 2, 2020, and August 12, 2021, and awarded Dr. Burstein reimbursement for those services along with penalty and interest. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding defendant liable for payment to lien claimant.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This fact led to the rescission of the WCJ's Findings and Orders and approval of the settlement, changing the outcome.
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
From the decision · page 1Defendant Technology Insurance Company petitions for reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on August 7, 2024. In that decision, the WCJ found, in pertinent part, that lien claimant Darrell Burstein, M.D. performed valid medical-legal services on or about June 2, 2020, and August 12, 2021, and awarded Dr. Burstein reimbursement for those services along with penalty and interest. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding defendant liable for payment to lien claimant.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code provisions governing lien claimant reimbursement
Applied to determine validity and payment of lien claimant's medical-legal services
From the decision · page 1Defendant Technology Insurance Company petitions for reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on August 7, 2024. In that decision, the WCJ found, in pertinent part, that lien claimant Darrell Burstein, M.D. performed valid medical-legal services on or about June 2, 2020, and August 12, 2021, and awarded Dr. Burstein reimbursement for those services along with penalty and interest. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding defendant liable for payment to lien claimant.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.