CASE NO. 884-CRD-7-89-6Workers’ Compensation Commission
MAY 24, 1990
The appeal in the above matter concerned issues between Stamford Hospital and the Respondents. Therefore, no appearance on behalf of the claimant was necessary. Further, by agreement of the parties before the Compensation Review Division, it was agreed that the matter would be decided on the basis of briefs submitted and oral argument was waived.
The Stamford Hospital was represented by Griffith H. Trow, Esq., Burdett, Trow Sank, P.C.
The respondents Pitney Bowes, Inc. and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., were represented by Kevin J. Maher, Esq., Maher Williams.
This Petition for Review from the June 15, 1989 Finding and Award of the Commissioner for the Seventh District was decided pursuant to papers submitted for the February 2, 1990 hearing before the Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners A. Paul Berte’ and Frank Verrilli.
OPINION
JOHN ARCUDI, CHAIRMAN.
This matter was decided below on stipulated facts incorporated into the Seventh District’s Finding and Award. It concerns the appropriateness of hospital charges.
Claimant on or about August 10, 1987 sustained a compensable injury, an inguinal hernia. He was admitted to the Stamford Hospital [Hospital] a two day stay, August 10, 1987 and August 11, 1987. The Hospital’s charges were calculated on the basis of Connecticut’s All Payor System, the so called Diagnostic Related Group [DRG] as provided in Sec. 19a-165 et seq. The Hospital’s DRG charges were $13,818.41. The Hospital’s billing rate on the basis of itemized charges was calculated as $4,744.12.
Respondents in the instant matter paid on the basis of the latter $4,744.12 calculation. The Hospital sought to be paid the DRG amount. The Seventh District agreed the DRG sum was proper.
Tanner v. Walgren Tree Experts, 748 CRD-8-88-7 (decided January 17, 1990) appeal docketed, No. A.C. 8865 (Conn.App. Feb. 2, 1990) is directly on point. In Tanner, we held that appropriate amount was the DRG charge as set pursuant to Sec. 19a-165f. Consequently Tanner is dispositive of the issue here raised. Therefore, for all the reasons there set out we affirm the Seventh District Commissioner.
Commissioners A. Paul Berte’ and Frank Verrilli concur.