In Sierra Pacific Industries v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, 2006 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8668, Cal.App. 3 Dist., June 30, 2006, a California Court of Appeal again considered the effect of an amended Labor Code provision on workers’ compensation cases which were pending when the amendment was passed. As it has in a number of previous decisions, the Court concluded that an amendment in SB 899 was effective immediately and applied to a claimant’s case even though the claimant’s treatment ended nearly two months before the new law took effect.
Facts
Prior to the enactment of SB 899 on April 19, 2004, California law did not require the application of guidelines provided by the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) in evaluating whether medical treatment was reasonable and necessary. SB 899 amended Labor Code § 4600 to adopt the ACOEM guidelines as the standard for all such evaluations.
Claimant, Corey Chatman, was injured on September 22, 2003, and soon thereafter began receiving chiropractic treatment every few days through February 26, 2004. Employer, SPI, disputed the need for continuing treatment. In an April 2005 trial concerning allowance of payment to Claimant’s chiropractor, the evidence indicated that the chiropractor’s treatment was not reasonable and necessary under ACOEM guidelines. However, the workers’ compensation judge, in an order entered in May 2005, determined the ACOEM guidelines did not apply because SB 899 was not in effect when Claimant sustained his injury in 2003. The judge found that under prior standards the treatment was reasonable and necessary through February 26, 2004. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board followed the recommendation of the workers’ compensation judge and denied Employer’s petition for reconsideration. Employer appealed.
Decision
The Court of Appeal held that the provisions of SB 899 imposing the new guidelines for evaluation of reasonable medical treatment applied to Claimant’s case.
The California Legislature intended that SB 899 “shall apply prospectively” from the date of enactment of the statute, regardless of the date that a claimant’s injury occurred; therefore, the provisions of SB 899 setting forth the new guidelines apply to all “pending cases for which the determination of reasonable medical treatment had not yet been made” as of the date of enactment of SB 899, the Court stated. In Claimant’s case, that determination was first made by the workers’ compensation judge at a trial occurring in 2005, more than a year after the enactment of SB 899. Thus, the ACOEM guidelines applied, and the WCAB should have granted Employer’s petition for reconsideration. The Court of Appeal annulled the WCAB decision and remanded the case for further consideration.
Legal Alert Disclaimer
Legal Alerts are published by Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard as a timely reporting service to alert clients and other friends of recent changes in case law, opinions or codes. This alert does not represent the legal opinion of the firm or any member of the firm on the issues described, and the information contained in this publication should not be construed as legal advice. Should further analysis or explanation of the subject matter be required, please contact the attorney with whom you normally consult.