Calif. settles with eight doctors in ‘underground regulations’ case

285

The California Division of Workers Compensation on Thursday settled with eight doctors who accused regulators of relying on “underground regulations” to its medical billing rules to deny their reappointment as qualified medical evaluators, an attorney representing the doctors confirmed Friday.

The division has “entered into meaningful and substantial settlements with our firm’s (eight) QME clients. Of great significance is that each settlement agreement states that the DWC will no longer be enforcing (four) billing categories that we argued, successfully, were underground regulations,” attorney Nicholas Roxborough, a Los Angeles-based partner at Roxborough, Pomerance, Nye & Adreani L.L.P. wrote in an email to Business Insurance.

Officials with the California Department of Industrial Relations did not return requests for comment.

In September 2017, several doctors sought a writ of mandate asking the California DIR, California DWC to cease and desist from enforcing improperly adopted regulations and to reappoint them as QMEs, which they were denied, according to documents in Dr. Timothy C. Howard, et al. v. California Department of Industrial Relations, et al.

Neither had ever received billing complaints from the DWC, according to documents.

QMEs are appointed for two-year terms in specialties required for the evaluation of medical issues. The DWC is obligated to reappoint QMEs who meet all the educational and other standards set forth by California Labor Code section 139.2 and who have not violated certain regulations after a due process hearing, according to case documents.

Legal warning !
The information, comments and suggestions there are not covered by investment advice. It is based on the author's personal opinions. These views may not fit your financial situation and risk and return preferences. For this reason, based solely on this information, investment decisions may not have the appropriate consequences for your expectation. Our Site is not responsible for any direct or indirect damages incurred by the investors as a result of the use of the information on the Site, deficiencies in the sources, damages incurred by profit, moral damages, or damage to third parties.