Per Curiam.
The disputed order states:
"* * * The Employer's Motion for a peer review is denied as the motion was not supported by medical or other evidence.
"The Board also finds that the reports of Doctor John W. Leist and Dr. Richard F. Stahr support the treatment being provided * * *."
The emphasized language can be interpreted one of two ways. It can be read as saying that Abex presented no evidence on behalf of its motion...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
