W.C. Nos. 4-357-688 4-386-527 4-390-936 4-410-543Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
May 24, 2000
ORDER OF REMAND
Respondents Best Western Landmark Hotel and Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company (Lumbermens respondents) seek review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Corchado (ALJ) holding them liable for two injuries and awarding temporary total disability benefits. We remand the matter for further proceedings.
A hearing was held on August 4, 1999. On October 26, 1999, the ALJ signed a summary order holding the Lumbermens respondents liable, and the order was mailed to the parties on October 27, 1999. The file does not contain any record of a request for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. However, on December 16, 1999, the ALJ entered specific findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the Lumbermens respondents filed a timely petition to review.
Section 8-43-215, C.R.S. 1999, provides: “Any party dissatisfied with a summary order may request specific findings of fact and conclusions of law in writing within fifteen days after the date of the certificate of mailing of the summary order.” Failure timely to request specific findings of fact and conclusions of law constitutes a jurisdictional defect which requires dismissal of the appeal. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, ___ P.2d ___ (Colo.App. No. 99CA0963, March 2, 2000); Reed v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office,
__P.2d ___ (Colo.App. No. 99CA0084, January 20, 2000). Jurisdiction cannot be waived or destroyed by consent, nor can it be conferred by estoppel. Hasbrouck v. Industrial Commission, 685 P.2d 780 (Colo.App. 1984).
Here, the record contains no evidence that the Lumbermens respondents filed a timely request for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law in response to the October 26 summary order. Consequently, we are unable to determine whether the ALJ had jurisdiction to enter the December 16 specific findings of fact and conclusions of law, and whether we have jurisdiction to review the Lumbermens respondents’ appeal from the December 16 order. Under these circumstances the matter must be remanded to the ALJ to determine whether the Lumbermens respondents filed a timely request for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. See O’Neal v. Wal-Mart, Inc., W.C. No. 4-353-280 (December 1, 1998). If so, a copy of that request should be included in the record. Once this determination has been made, the ALJ may return the matter to us for review of the December 16 order, or dismiss the Lumbermens respondents’ appeal.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the matter is remanded to the ALJ for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
____________________________________ David Cain
____________________________________ Bill Whitacre
Copies of this decision were mailed May 24, 2000
to the following parties:
Sunny Ferrenburg, 1030 Washington St., #11, Denver, CO 80203
Cheryl Marchetti, Best Western Landmark Hotel, 455 S. Colorado Blvd., Denver, CO 80246-8002
Brenda Wisniewski, Wausau Insurance Companies, P. O. Box 419157, Kansas City, MO 64141-6157
Dawn Kaup, Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, P. O. Box 5347, Denver, CO 80217
Thomas J. Roberts, Esq., 1650 Emerson St., Denver, CO 80218 (For Claimant)
J. Barton Maxwell, Esq., 950 17th St., #2100, Denver, CO 80202 (For Respondents Best Western Landmark Hotel and Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company)
William M. Sterck, Esq., 2881 N. Monroe Ave., #2, Loveland, CO 80538 (For Wausau Insurance Companies)
BY: A. Pendroy