W.C. No. 4-100-755Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
October 28, 1998
ORDER
The respondents seek review of a order of Administrative Law Judge Wells (ALJ), which set aside a settlement agreement. Because we conclude that the ALJ’s order is not currently subject to review, we dismiss the petition to review without prejudice.
The ALJ’s order reflects that the parties entered into a settlement agreement in June 1993. In October 1996, the claimant filed a petition to reopen alleging a worsened condition. The respondents interposed the settlement agreement as a defense. The claimant responded that the settlement agreement should be set aside or vacated because it was void or the product of mistake.
At the commencement of the hearing, the ALJ and counsel discussed what benefits should be awarded if the ALJ were to set aside the settlement agreement. Counsel for the claimant opined that the ALJ could award temporary total disability benefits from the date of the hearing, or award “indemnity benefits” with the “nature of the disability” determined “down the road.” Further, the parties stipulated that the claimant’s condition had “worsened” subsequent to approval of the settlement, but no stipulation was reached concerning the date of the worsening. (Tr. pp. 7-8).
On August 25, 1997, the ALJ entered the order under review. The ALJ noted the parties’ agreement that the “exact date of onset of Claimant’s worsened condition. . . is a matter that should be taken up at a subsequent proceeding.” The ALJ then set aside the settlement agreement, stating that either party could request an additional hearing “for provision of an order declaring the date of commencement of indemnity benefits owed to Claimant in this open and ongoing claim.”
Section 8-43-301 (2), C.R.S. 1998, provides that a party “dissatisfied with an order” may file a petition to review if the order requires any party to pay a penalty or benefits, or denies the claimant any benefit or penalty. Orders which do not satisfy these criteria are interlocutory and not subject to review Director of the Division of Labor v. Smith, 725 P.2d 1161
(Colo.App. 1986) (order reopening a claim is not reviewable absent an award or denial of benefits).
We have previously held that orders setting aside settlement agreements or rescinding approval of settlement agreements are, standing alone, interlocutory. This is true because such orders do not require the payment of benefits or penalties, nor do they deny the claimant any benefit or penalties. Orth v. Southland Corp., W.C. No. 4-190-191 (February 27, 1998); Gonzales v. Redfield Rifle Scopes, Inc., W.C. No. 3-954-062 (June 30, 1993). Consequently, the ALJ’s August 25 order is interlocutory because it does not deny the claimant any benefits or penalties, nor does it require the respondents to pay any benefits or penalties. To the contrary, the ALJ’s order contemplates further hearings to establish the claimant’s right to additional disability benefits, if any.
We recognize that the ALJ granted the respondents a “credit” for benefits paid pursuant to the settlement. However, this provision does not render the order reviewable because it does not deny the claimant any benefits or penalties, nor does it require the respondents to pay any benefit or penalty. Rather, the significance of the “credit” is dependent on a subsequent order concerning the nature of any benefits owed to the claimant.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondents’ petition to review the ALJ’s order dated August 25, 1997, 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. 1998.
Copies of this decision were mailed October 28, 1998 to the following parties:
Karen L. Piel, 4946 Durasno Terrace, Security, CO 80911
Schlage Lock Company, 3866 Hancock Expressway, Colorado Springs, CO 80911-1231
CNA Insurance Company, Attn: Lisa C. Biggs, P. O. Box 17369 T. A., Denver, CO 80217
Steven U. Mullens, Esq., P. O. Box 2940, Colorado Springs, CO 80901-2940 (For Claimant)
Tama L. Levine, Esq., 1515 Arapahoe St., Tower 3, #600, Denver, CO 80202 (For Respondents)
BY: _______________________