Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Curry White: A Future-Medical Dispute Needs a Concrete Request and Denial

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 16, 2026

Elizabeth Curry White had resolved her claim with a right to future medical care and later sought a hearing. The presiding judge took the matter off calendar after finding no concrete treatment request or denial ready for adjudication.

Open medical care did not itself create a present dispute

The prior settlement preserved future medical treatment for the back. At the June 2026 hearing, however, the worker did not present a current request for treatment, documentation of a denial, a utilization-review dispute, or an independent-medical-review appeal.

Taking the matter off calendar was nonfinal

The order did not determine a substantive right, liability, or threshold issue. Reconsideration therefore was not available from that intermediate case-management ruling.

Removal also required extraordinary harm

The Board found no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm from the off-calendar order. A concrete dispute could be presented later, making ordinary future proceedings an adequate remedy.

The opinion described how to return

A new declaration of readiness should identify the disputed issue and, for treatment, include relevant medical reports and insurer correspondence. The Board noted that any applicable prefiling procedure also had to be followed.

Key takeaways

• Identify the specific treatment requested.
• Preserve the request, utilization-review response, and insurer correspondence.
• Use the correct review path for the type of medical dispute.
• File a supported declaration of readiness when an adjudicable issue exists.