No. 05155495 (1999). CLAIMANT: Richard M. Opper, D.C.

• Case Date: May 11, 1999
• Court: Massachusetts

Massachusetts Workers Compensation 1999. No. 05155495 (1999). CLAIMANT: Richard M. Opper, D.C COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS CLAIMANT: Richard M. Opper, D.C. EMPLOYEE: Pauline A. Lincoln EMPLOYER: Monson Developmental Center/Dept of Mental Retardation INSURER: Commonwealth of MassachusettsBOARD NO. 05155495REVIEWING BOARD DECISION (Judges McCarthy, Wilson and Smith)APPEARANCES Terence H. Buckley, Esq., for the self-insurer Richard M. Opper, D.C., pro-se MCCARTHY, J. Pauline Lincoln worked at Monson Development Center, a facility operated by the Department of Mental Retardation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. On December 21, 1995, Ms. Lincoln sustained an industrial injury arising out of and in the course of her employment. She was out of work for a closed period and was paid weekly incapacity benefits by the self-insurer. Immediately following the accident, the employee received medical treatment at Mary Lane Hospital in Ware, Massachusetts. On February 23, 1996, she was referred to Richard M. Opper, a chiropractor. Doctor Opper treated the employee from that date until July 10, 1996. The Commonwealth paid for chiropractic treatment through March 25, 1996, but refused payment for treatment rendered after that date. Doctor Opper filed a claim for a payment of the treatment he provided and following a conference on that claim, an administrative judge directed payment for the chiropractic treatment through July 1996 at applicable board rates. The self-insurer complied with the order and made payment to Dr. Opper. It also appealed the conference order and asserted its right to a hearing under § 11. At some point prior to the hearing, the self-insurer requested an impartial medical examination. The judge refused an impartial examination because "the treatment period was long since over, and the review would be little more than a records review." (Dec. 1.) When the case came on for hearing under § 11, the self-insurer renewed its objection to the judge's refusal to order an impartial examination. The judge overruled the objection, the self-insurer took exception to the ruling in order to preserve the issue for appeal. (Dec. 1.) Having taken exception to the judge's ruling, "the insurer did not otherwise contest the order of payment." (Dec. 1.) The judge then issued a hearing order directing...