W.C. No. 4-379-519Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
December 27, 1999
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Gandy (ALJ) which determined that he was an “independent contractor” and, therefore, denied the claim for benefits. We affirm.
The ALJ found the claimant was employed “on a seasonal basis to ride and break horses for trainers in the Northern Colorado area.” Applying the statutory criteria found in §8-40-202(2)(b)(II), C.R.S. 1999, the ALJ determined that the “totality of the circumstances” establishes the claimant was an independent contractor at the time he fell off a horse and injured his hand. The ALJ specifically found that the claimant was not required to work exclusively for the respondent; the respondent did not establish specific quality standards or direct the performance of the work; the claimant was paid on a per ride basis and not by the hour; the respondent did not provide training; any equipment provided was “minimal” and the claimant borrowed a saddle from another trainer; and the respondent did not “dictate the time of performance” because the claimant was free to come and go at mutually agreed hours. Consequently, the ALJ denied the claim for benefits.
The claimant filed a petition to review the ALJ’s order. The petition contains only general allegations of error, and the claimant did not file a brief in support the petition to review. Consequently, the effectiveness of our review is limited.
The ALJ correctly determined the claimant’s status as an independent contractor depends on the application of the criteria found in § 8-40-202(2)(b)(II). However, there was no requirement that the respondent prove the existence of every one of the factors listed in the statute. Nelson v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 981 P.2d 210 (Colo.App. 1998).
Here, substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s findings of fact concerning the relationship between the claimant and the respondent. Consequently, these findings must be upheld on review. Section 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. 1999. Moreover, the findings support the ALJ’s legal conclusion that the claimant was an independent contractor. Nelson v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, supra. Consequently, the order must be upheld.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated December 30, 1998, 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. 1999.
Copies of this decision were mailed December 27, 1999 to the following parties:
Luis R. Caballero, 706 36th Ave., Greeley, CO 80631
Gail A. Hardin, 10709 N. County Road 3, Wellington, CO 80549-1711
Esteban A. Salazar, Esq., 1439 5th St., Greeley, CO 80631 (For Claimant)
Erik G. Fischer, Esq., P.O. Box 506, Ft. Collins, CO 80522-0506 (For Respondent)
BY: A. Pendroy