W.C. No. 4-188-631Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
December 31, 1996
ORDER
The respondents seek review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Gandy (ALJ) insofar as it ordered them to provide reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the claimant’s knee condition. We dismiss the petition to review without prejudice.
The ALJ’s order addressed two separate issues. The first issue, which is not under review here, concerns the respondents’ liability for a health club membership needed to treat the claimant’s industrial back injury. The second issue concerns whether or not the claimant’s knee problems are causally connected to the back injury. The ALJ determined that claimant proved the requisite causal relationship, and ordered the respondents to pay for “reasonable and necessary medical treatment” of the knee problems. The ALJ also found that no treatment has yet been provided for the knees, and reserved all matters not previously determined for future consideration.
On review, the respondents contend that the ALJ erred in finding a causal relationship between the back injury and the knee problems. Therefore, they contend that the ALJ erred in awarding “medical care” for the knee problems.
Under § 8-43-301(2), C.R.S. (1996 Cum. Supp.), a party dissatisfied with an order “which requires any party to pay a penalty or benefits or denies a claimant any benefit or penalty,” may file a petition to review. 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). Thus, orders which determine liability for benefits, without determining the amount and type of benefits owed, do not award or deny benefits as contemplated by § 8-43-301(2). Director of the Division of Labor v. Smith, 725 P.2d 1161 (Colo.App. 1986). Moreover, orders may be partially final and reviewable, and partially interlocutory. Oxford Chemicals, Inc. v. Richardson, 782 P.2d 843 (Colo.App. 1989).
In view of these principles, we have previously held that orders which determine the compensability of an industrial injury and make a general award of medical benefits are interlocutory if no specific medical benefits were requested and at issue. Eg. Gonzales v. Public Service Co. of Colorado, W.C. No. 4-131-978, May 14, 1996. This is true because liability fo specific medical treatments remains subject to an argument that the disputed treatments are not reasonable and necessary. See Williams v. Industrial Commission, 723 P.2d 749 (Colo.App. 1986).
In this case, the ALJ’s award of medical benefits associated with the claimant’s knee problems is interlocutory. The claimant was not seeking any particular treatments for his knees, and the ALJ did not order any particular treatments. It is true that the ALJ ordered the respondents to pay for the claimant’s health club membership, but that order pertained to the claimant’s back injury. Therefore, that provision of the order is not sufficient to finalize the disputed portion of the order. Oxford Chemicals, Inc. v. Richardson, supra.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondents’ petition to review the ALJ’s order dated May 8, 1996, is dismissed without prejudice.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
___________________________________ David Cain
___________________________________ Kathy E. Dean
NOTICE
An action to modify or vacate this Order may be commenced in the 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 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 December 31, 1996
to the following parties:
Clifton R. McCree, 3135 Adams St., Denver, CO 80205
Gerry Baby Products Co., 12520 Grant Dr., Denver, CO 80241-2406
Travelers Indemnity Co., Attn: Renessa Jensen, P. O. Box 173762, Denver, CO 80217-3762
Steven H. Gurwin, Esq., 1777 S. Harrison St., #906, Denver, CO 80210 (For Claimant)
Christina M. Middendorf, Esq., 1290 Broadway, #708, Denver, CO 80203 (For Respondents)
By: ______________________________