IN RE SAKANAI, W.C. No. 4-208-614 (5/7/96)


IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF FRANCES M. SAKANAI, Claimant, v. DELUXE/CURRENT, INC., Employer, and TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, Insurer, Respondents.

W.C. No. 4-208-614Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
May 7, 1996

ORDER

The claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Wheelock (ALJ) which directs her to pay expert witness fees. We dismiss the petition to review without prejudice.

The issue in this case stems from a hearing which was held on June 12, 1995. At the hearing, the claimant sought to join as parties three health care providers who had rendered treatment for the industrial injury. During the course of the hearing one of the providers, Miss Gerig, gave testimony pursuant to the claimant’s subpoena.

At the conclusion of the hearing the ALJ denied the request to join the health care providers as parties to the claim. Subsequently, on July 12, 1995, the ALJ granted Gerig’s motion for expert witness fees on account of the testimony. The claimant appealed the July 12 order.

Under § 8-43-301(2), C.R.S. (1995 Cum. Supp.), a party “dissatisfied with an order” may file a petition to review if the order requires any party to pay any penalty or benefit or denies the claimant any benefit or penalty. Only final orders are subject to review. Director of the Division of Labor v. Smith, 725 P.2d 1161 (Colo.App. 1986). Orders which neither award nor deny benefits are not final. American Express v. Industrial Commission, 712 P.2d 1132 (Colo.App. 1985).

Here, the ALJ’s order denying the claimant’s request to join parties is not final because it does not award or deny any benefits or penalties. In fact, the claimant could file separate claims against the health providers if there is any legal basis for doing so.

It follows that the award of expert witness fees is not final and appealable. The witness fees do not constitute a “benefit” or penalty.” To the contrary, the award of witness fees is merely an adjunct to an interlocutory order and is not now subject to our review. American Express v. Industrial Commission, supra.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the claimant’s petition to review the ALJ’s order, dated July 12, 1995, is dismissed without prejudice.

INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEAL PANEL

___________________________________ David Cain
___________________________________ Kathy E. Dean

NOTICE

An action to modify or vacate the Order may be commenced in theColorado Court of Appeals, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80203, byfiling a petition to review with the court, with service of a copy of thepetition 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. (1995 Cum. Supp.).

Copies of this decision were mailed May 7, 1996 to the following parties:

Frances M. Sakanai, 901 Tamarac Dr., Security, CO 80911

Deluxe/Current, Inc., P. O. Box 260729, Lakewood, CO 80226-0729

Travelers Indemnity Company, % Travelers Insurance, P. O. Box 173762, Denver, CO 80217

Gail Gerig, PT, Hands on Therapy, 108 E. St. Vrain, #21, Colorado Springs, CO 80903

Steven U. Mullens, Esq., 90 S. Cascade Ave., #300, P. O. Box 2940, Colorado Springs, CO 80901-2940 (For Claimant)

Tama Levine, Esq., 1290 Broadway, #708, Denver, CO 80203 (For Respondents)

Douglas A. Weddell, Esq., P. O. Box 636, Colorado Springs, CO 80901 (For Gail Gerig)

By: __________________________