What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration denied; lien claimant takes nothing by way of its alleged lien balance.
Lien claimant sought reconsideration of the WCJ's Findings of Fact and Order denying its lien for additional payment, arguing the WCJ erred in not trying all three case numbers together and that its lien was reasonable and necessary. The WCAB reviewed the petition and the WCJ's report, which it adopted and incorporated.
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.
Lien claimant failed to prove its balance was reasonable or necessary; its Market Rate Analysis was unauthenticated, incomplete, and not substantial evidence; invoices were unexplained and not authenticated; all dates of service were already paid in part by defendant.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Lien claimant's Market Rate Analysis was unauthenticated, incomplete, and not substantial evidence.
Favours Defendant prevailed
It was the only document relied upon to substantiate the alleged balance, and its lack of authentication and completeness meant it could not support the lien.