Does section 2034(i)(2)(B) of the California Medical Code require an expert witness fee to be paid to a treating physician who also gives standard care opinion testimony?

In Brun v. Bailey, supra, 27 Cal.App.4th 641, 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 624, this court held the aforesaid language of section 2034(i)(2)(B) did not require payment of an expert witness fee to a treating physician who "testifies regarding his or her knowledge of the patient's treatment, diagnosis or prognosis" because, pursuant to common law, such testimony does not constitute an expert opinion. (Id., at pp. 654-655, 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 624.) Hence, a treating physician who gave only percipient expert opinion testimony was not entitled to an expert witness fee, whereas a treating physician who also gave standard of care opinion testimony would receive such compensation.