W.C. No. 4-242-512Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
August 21, 1997
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Wells (ALJ), which denied her claim for temporary disability and medical benefits. We affirm.
The respondent admitted that the claimant sustained a compensable head injury on January 21, 1993. The issue in the case was whether subsequent symptoms, including headaches, dizziness and back pain were causally connected to this injury.
The ALJ made extensive findings of fact and concluded that the subsequent symptoms were not related. In support of this conclusion, the ALJ cited the opinions of several medical experts. He also noted that the disputed symptoms did not develop for some time after the alleged injury, and that the treating physician released the claimant to regular work and found no evidence of permanent impairment on January 27, 1993. Consequently, the ALJ denied the claim for additional benefits.
The claimant has not filed a brief in support of her petition to review. Consequently, the effectiveness of our review is limited. Moreover, the claimant has not provided a transcript, and therefore, we must presume that the ALJ’s findings concerning the testimony are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Nova v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 754 P.2d 800
(Colo.App. 1988).
The only specific allegations of error contained in the claimant’s January 27, 1997 petition to review concern the sufficiency of the evidence to support the ALJ’s factual findings. First, the claimant asserts that the ALJ erred by inferring a possible relationship between her post-injury hysterectomy and the development of headaches and neck pain. However, this finding is supported by Dr. Pennington’s April 26, 1994 report. That report suggests that the claimant’s hysterectomy caused her to experience stress, and that this stress is a factor in her symptoms.
The claimant also states that she consistently reported “severe pain and other symptoms to numerous doctors.” However, the ALJ pointed out that this testimony is inconsistent with the medical records, and therefore, he was not persuaded by it.
Under these circumstances, we conclude that the ALJ’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld. Section 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. (1996 Cum. Supp.). The mere fact that the evidence might have supported other findings provides no basis for relief on appeal. May D F v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 752 P.2d 589 (Colo.App. 1988). Moreover, the claimant has not identified any other basis for setting aside the ALJ’s order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated January 17, 1991, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
______________________________ David Cain
______________________________ Kathy E. Dean
NOTICE
This Order is final unless an action to modify or vacatethe Order is commenced in the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2 East14th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80203, by filing a petition toreview with the court, with service of a copy of the petitionupon the Industrial Claim Appeals Office and all other parties,within twenty (20) days after the date the Order was mailed,pursuant to §§ 8-43-301(10) and 307, C. R. S. (1996 Cum.Supp.).
Copies of this decision were mailed August 21, 1997 to the following parties:
Melida Alexander, 4825 Astrozon Blvd., #40A, Colorado Springs, CO 80916
El Paso County School District, #11, Attn: Jean Houston, 11115 North El Paso, Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Gregory Cairns, Esq., 3900 E. Mexico Ave., #1300, Denver, CO 80210 (For the Respondent)
James Harrison Massey, Esq., 320 + Main St., Longmont, CO 80501 (For the Claimant)
By: _______________________________