W.C. No. 4-214-844Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
August 6, 1997
ORDER
The respondent seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Rumler (ALJ), which determined that the claimant sustained a compensable reaction to a TB test. We dismiss the petition to review without prejudice.
The ALJ found that the claimant sustained a compensable aggravation of a preexisting condition when she was required to take a TB test. Further, the ALJ rejected the respondent’s argument that any temporary disability and medical benefits awarded should be apportioned in accordance with the decision i Anderson v. Brinkhoff, 859 P.2d 819 (Colo. 1993). The respondent filed a timely petition to review this order.
However, the ALJ’s order contains no award establishing the amount and periods of temporary total disability benefits, nor any specific award of medical benefits. To the contrary, the ALJ stated that, “if the parties cannot agree on the amounts and type of these benefits, they can return for a hearing on those issues.” Further, the order reserves all unresolved issues for future determination.
Pursuant to § 8-43-301(2), C.R.S. (1996 Cum. Supp.), a dissatisfied party may file a petition to review an order “which requires any party to pay a penalty or benefits or denies a claimant any benefit or penalty.” Orders which do not require the payment of benefits or penalties, or deny the claimant benefits or penalties are interlocutory and not subject to review. Natkin Co. v. Eubanks, 775 P.2d 88 (Colo.App. 1989). More specifically, orders which determine liability for benefits without determining the amount and type of benefits to be paid are interlocutory and not subject to review. Director of the Division of Labor v. Smith, 725 P.2d 1161 (Colo.App. 1986).
Here, the ALJ’s order merely determines that the claimant may be entitled to temporary total disability and medical benefits, but does not order the payment of any specific benefits. To the contrary, the order contemplates further proceedings on the issue of benefits. Under these circumstances, the ALJ’s order is interlocutory, and the petition to review must be dismissed without prejudice. E.g. Gonzales v. Public Service Co., W.C. No. 4-131-978 (May 14, 1996) (order determining that claim was compensable was not reviewable where ALJ ordered payment of “all reasonable and necessary medical expenses,” but record revealed that no specific medical benefits were at issue).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondent’s petition to review the ALJ’s order dated July 22, 1996, is dismissed without prejudice.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
______________________________ David Cain
______________________________ Kathy E. Dean
NOTICE
An action to modify or vacate the Order may be commenced inthe Colorado Court of Appeals, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver,Colorado 80203, by filing a petition to review with the court,with service of a copy of the petition upon the Industrial ClaimAppeals Office and all other parties, within twenty (20) daysafter 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 6, 1997 to the following parties:
Astrid Go, 1149 S. University Blvd., Denver, CO 80210
Debbie Hawthorne, Porter Memorial Hospital, 2525 S. Downing St., Denver, CO 80210
Ina Warboys, Porter Memorial Hospital, 2525 S. Downing St., Denver, CO 80210
Jim Banich, OHMS, Inc., 700 Broadway, Ste. 1132, Denver, CO 80273
Barbara J. Furutani, Esq. David M. Pantos, Esq., 1732 Race St., Denver, CO 80206 (For the Claimant)
Pamela Musgrave, Esq. Christine A. McBride, Esq., 777 E. Speer Blvd., Ste. 210 Denver, CO 80203 (For the Respondent)
By: _______________________________