W.C. No. 4-556-323.Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
September 19, 2003.
FINAL ORDER
The pro se claimant seeks review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Martinez (ALJ) which denied and dismissed the claim for benefits. We affirm.
The ALJ found the claimant failed to prove that an alleged industrial back injury caused the symptoms for which the claimant sought compensation. In support, the ALJ relied on evidence that the claimant delayed reporting the alleged injury to the employer and several medical providers. The ALJ also relied on the opinion of Dr. Pasterz that the claimant’s back pain is most likely the result of degenerative disc disease.
The claimant filed a petition to review, but the petition contains no specific arguments. It merely states the claimant was “misrepresented” and has “more evidence to present.” The claimant did not file a brief.
The claimant had the burden to prove that the back condition was proximately caused by an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment. Section 8-41-301(1)(c), C.R.S. 2002; 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. Consequently, we must uphold the ALJ’s determination if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Section 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. 2002; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claims Office, 989 P.2d 251 (Colo.App. 1999).
Here, the claimant failed to procure a transcript, or make a timely application for indigent status so that the state could procure a transcript for him. (ALJ’s letter dated June 13, 2003). Under these circumstances, we must presume the ALJ’s findings concerning the evidence presented at the hearing are supported by substantial evidence. Nova v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 754 P.2d 800 (Colo.App. 1988). Further, the ALJ’s findings are supported by the documentary evidence contained in the record, and the deposition testimony of Dr. Pasterz. Consequently, we must uphold the ALJ’s finding that the claimant failed to meet the burden of proof to establish a compensable injury.
Moreover, the claimant has made no offer of proof concerning the additional evidence which he now seeks to present. Consequently, there is no basis for concluding the ALJ abused his discretion by not continuing the hearing for the receipt of additional evidence. Section 8-43-207(1)(j), C.R.S. (2002); § 8-43-301(5), C.R.S. 2002 (ALJ may set matter for further hearing when considering petition to review); Dee Enterprises v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, ___ P.3d ___ (Colo.App. No. 02CA2040, July 31, 2003) (ALJ has discretion to determine whether to permit post-hearing evidence).
The quality of the representation which the claimant received is not a matter for determination within the administrative framework. Thus, we have no jurisdiction to consider this issue.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated February 21, 2003, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
______________________________ David Cain
______________________________ Kathy E. Dean
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, Colorado 80203, by filing a Petition to Review with the Court, within twenty (20) days after the date this Order was mailed, pursuant to §8-43-301(10) and § 8-43-307, C.R.S. 2002. 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 order were mailed to the parties at the addresses shown below on September 19, 2003 by A. Pendroy.
Michael Wade Ashby, 2855 Teller Ave., Grand Junction, CO 81501
E. C. Electric, 747 W. White Ave., Grand Junction, CO 81505
Wendy Stalkfleet, RSKCo, P. O. Box 4518, Greenwood Village, CO 80155-4518
Robert H. Coate, Esq., 950 17th St., 21st floor, Denver, CO 80202-2804 (For Respondents)