THESE ANNOTATIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
Full texts of opinions, statutes and court decisions should be consulted and all citations and references fully researched by the reader.
The Annotations to Compensation Review Board Opinions are presented “as is” and the Commission makes no warranties as to the suitability of this information for any given purpose.
Please note also that Annotations change periodically due to several factors including, but not limited to, Appellate and Supreme Court decisions issued in workers’ compensation cases.
Hall v. UTC/Pratt & Whitney, 15 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 103, 2146 CRB-8-94-9 (December 22, 1995).
The medical care provider filed a petition for review from the decision of the Ad Hoc Dispute Resolution Panel regarding a determination of disputed medical fees. The panel’s decision did not contain any findings of fact, nor did it state a reason for the conclusion that only seven of the sixteen office visits were reasonable and customary. Accordingly, as the CRB is unable to properly review the panel’s decision, the case was remanded in order for a de novo formal hearing to be held by a new panel pursuant to § 31-280-3.