Bland v. GellmanBland v. Gellman
In 1993, a workers’ compensation claim was established for claimant (claim No. 1), and responsibility for such claim was thereafter transferred to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases in 2008. A second claim was established with a 2008 date of disablement (claim No. 2), for which Travelers Insurance Company is responsible, and liability was thereafter apportioned equally between the claims. In October 2011, claimant‘s treating physician requested a variance for approval of 10 weeks of aquatic therapy and the Special Fund and Travelers both denied the request. Claimant requested a review of such denials and, fol
We reverse. Pursuant to
The Board further concluded that claimant did not timely request review of the carriers’ denials of the variance. In this regard, a request to review a denial of a variance must be made within 21 business days of receipt of the denial (see
As a result of the foregoing, the parties’ remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court or have been rendered academic by our decision.
Mercure, J.P., Spain and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is reversed, with costs, and matter remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court‘s decision.