W.C. No. 4-459-030Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
February 22, 2002
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of a supplemental order of Administrative Law Judge Felter (ALJ) which denied and dismissed the claim for medical and temporary disability benefits allegedly caused by an industrial injury on January 17, 2000. We affirm.
On February 6, 2001, the ALJ entered an order finding the claimant failed to prove that medical treatment commencing April 13, 2000, and subsequent disability, were caused by an industrial injury on January 17, 2000. The ALJ credited the opinions of medical experts, particularly Dr. Dunning and Dr. Orent, who opined the claimant’s need for treatment and disability were caused by non-industrial pancreatitis, and were not causally related to the incident of January 17, when the claimant was kicked by a cow. On March 19, 2001, the ALJ entered the supplemental order which substantially incorporated the findings of February 6.
The claimant filed a petition to review the supplemental order. The petition to review contains general allegations of error concerning the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings, and the ALJ’s application of the law to the facts. The claimant did not file a brief in support of the petition to review. Under these circumstances, the effectiveness of our review is very limited.
The ALJ correctly recognized the claimant had the burden of proof to demonstrate a causal relationship between the industrial injury and the need for treatment and consequent disability. Section 8-41-301(1)(c), C.R.S. 2001; Faulkner v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 12 P.3d 844
(Colo.App. 2000). The question of whether the claimant met the burden of proof is one of fact for determination by the ALJ. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claims Office, 989 P.2d 251 (Colo.App. 1999). Consequently, we must uphold the ALJ’s resolution of the issue if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Section 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. 2001. This standard of review requires that we defer to the ALJ’s resolution of conflicts in the evidence, credibility determinations, and plausible inferences drawn from the record. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claims Office, supra.
Here, the ALJ made exhaustive findings of fact resolving conflicts between the opinions held by qualified medical experts. The ALJ’s findings concerning the testimony of these witnesses is fully supported by the record. Consequently, there is no basis for interfering with the ALJ’s order which found claimant failed to carry the burden of proof to establish causation. Rockwell International v. Turnbull, 802 P.2d 1182
(Colo.App. 1990) (it is for the ALJ to determine the weight and credibility of expert opinion on the issue of causation).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s supplemental order dated March 19, 2001, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
________________________________ David Cain
________________________________ Dona Halsey
NOTICE
This Order is final unless an action to modify or vacate this Order is commenced in the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, CO 80203, by filing a petition for review with the Court, within twenty (20) days after the date this Order is mailed, pursuant to §8-43-301(10) and § 8-43-307, C.R.S. 2001. The appealing party must serve a copy of the petition upon all other parties, including the Industrial Claim Appeals Office, which may be served by mail at 1515 Arapahoe, Tower 3, Suite 350, Denver, CO 80202.
Copies of this decision were mailed February 22, 2002 to the following parties:
Dale Young, 21977 WCR 78, Eaton, CO 80615
Lori Acuna, ConAgra Foods Claims Services, One ConAgra Dr., Greeley, CO 80634-9038
Britton Morrell, Esq., 710 11th Ave., #203, Greeley, CO 80631 (For Claimant)
Kyle Thacker, Esq., 999 18th St., #3100, Denver, CO 80202 (For Respondent)
BY: A. Pendroy