(433 P.2d 333)
No. 22348.Supreme Court of Colorado.
Decided November 13, 1967.
Workmen’s compensation proceeding by claimant who sought to proceed to an adjudication of his claim notwithstanding late filing. From a denial of his right to proceed, the claimant brought error.
Affirmed.
1. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION — Claim — Late Filing — Excuse — Prejudice — Finding — Recovery — Bar. Where claimant filed his claim for benefits fourteen months after the accident and Commission, after hearing, found that there was no reasonable excuse for such late filing and that the employer would be prejudiced by allowing the late filing, held, under such circumstances, the finding by the Commission, absent an abuse of discretion, precludes recovery.
Page 183
Error to the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Honorable Neil Horan, Judge.
George A. Hinshaw, for plaintiff in error.
Zarlengo, Mott and Carlin, for defendants in error W.T. Rawleigh Company and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company.
Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General, Frank E. Hickey, Deputy, Peter L. Dye, Assistant, for defendant in error Industrial Commission of Colorado.
In Department.
Opinion by MR. JUSTICE DAY.
[1] Plaintiff in error, a claimant for workmen’s compensation benefits before the Industrial Commission, filed his claim fourteen months after the date of the accident. This was beyond the allowable statutory period as set forth in C.R.S. 1963, 81-13-5. For him to be able to proceed to an adjudication of his claim it was necessary for the Industrial Commission to find: (a) that there was a reasonable excuse for the late filing; and (b) that no prejudice inured to the respondent employer. The Commission, after hearing, found that there was no excuse and that the employer would be prejudiced by allowing the late filing.
Under this court’s precedent in Industrial Commission v. Johnston, 151 Colo. 465, 378 P.2d 830 — the finding by the Commission, such as made in this case, absent an abuse of discretion on the part of the Commission, ends the matter.
The judgment is affirmed.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE MOORE and MR. JUSTICE PRINGLE concur.
Page 184