Workers’ Compensation · Primary-source case analysis

Torres: A Lien Claimant Must Prove Every Element of Its Claim

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 13, 2026

Torres v. AJC Sandblasting explains what a lien claimant must put into evidence at trial and why a billing form, standing alone, does not prove industrial liability for the claimed charges.

The underlying claims had settled

The injured worker’s denied claims were resolved by compromise and release. Unitech Medical, Inc. continued to pursue a lien, but at the lien trial it offered only an unsigned insurance form, called no witnesses, and submitted no other evidence establishing the facts necessary for payment.

The lien claimant carried the burden of proof

The Board read Labor Code sections 3202.5 and 5705 together. A lien claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence every element required for the lien, including the industrial basis for the service, the service actually furnished, and the amount lawfully payable. A defendant does not have to disprove an unsupported demand.

A billing form was not substantial evidence

The unsigned form did not establish who prepared it, whether the information was reliable, what services were provided, or why the employer was liable. The Board affirmed disallowance because the record contained no substantial evidence supporting the lien.

Unsupported litigation can trigger sanctions

The Board also affirmed the finding that pursuing a lien without supporting evidence may constitute bad-faith or frivolous conduct under section 5813. It deferred the amount and imposition of sanctions for further proceedings, preserving notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Key takeaways

• Identify and prove every statutory element of the lien.
• Authenticate billing and treatment records rather than relying on a bare form.
• Do not shift the claimant’s evidentiary burden to the defendant.
• Evaluate sanctions exposure before taking an unsupported lien to trial.