W.C. No. 4-443-731Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
July 18, 2001
FINAL ORDER
The pro se claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Stuber (ALJ) which denied and dismissed her claim for workers’ compensation benefits. We affirm.
The claimant alleged that she sustained compensable injuries to her shoulder, neck, and back when “checking and sacking” during the third week of August 1999. However, resolving conflicts in the evidence, the ALJ found the claimant failed to prove that she sustained an injury. In support, the of ALJ found the claimant did not report the alleged work-related injury until December 1999, was suffering from similar symptoms prior to the alleged injury, and was taking narcotic pain medication for 10 years prior to the alleged injury.
The claimant filed a petition to review the order, but cited no specific errors of fact or law. Further, the claimant did not file a brief in support of her petition to review. Consequently, the effectiveness of our review is limited.
The claimant had the burden of proof to establish that she sustained compensable injuries arising out of and in the course of her employment Faulkner v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 12 P.3d 844 (Colo.App. 2000). The question of whether the claimant met her burden of proof is one of fact for determination by the ALJ. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 989 P.2d 251 (Colo.App. 1999). Because the issue is factual in nature, we must uphold the ALJ’s order if supported by substantial evidence in the record. Section 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. 2000. This standard of review requires us to defer to the ALJ’s resolution of conflicts in the evidence, his credibility determinations, and the plausible inferences he drew from the record. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, supra.
We have reviewed the transcript of the hearing and the documentary evidence. Although the evidence was conflicting, the ALJ resolved the conflicts in favor of the respondents. Consequently, we conclude the record contains substantial evidence in support of the ALJ’s order, and the ALJ correctly applied the law to the facts. Therefore, there is no basis for interfering with the order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated June 22, 2000, 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, CO 80203, by filing a petition for review with the Court, within twenty (20) days after the date this Order is mailed, pursuant to §8-43-301(10) and § 8-43-307, C.R.S. 2000. 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 decision were mailed July 18, 2001 to the following parties:
Debra A. Darnell, 4242-A South Mobile Circle, Aurora, CO 80013
King Soopers, Inc., Workers’ Comp. Dept., P. O. Box 5567 T. A., Denver, CO 80217-5567
Tama L. Levine, Esq., 1515 Arapahoe St., Tower 3, #600, Denver, CO 80202 (For Respondent)
BY: A. Pendroy