W.C. No. 4-486-812.Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
June 23, 2006.
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of an order dated February 6, 2006 of Administrative Law Judge Mattoon (ALJ) that denied the claimant’s request for medical benefits to pay for Dr. Hall’s treatment and found Dr. Leppard to be the authorized treating physician. We affirm.
The claimant sustained a compensable back injury on December 26, 2000. The claimant received authorized medical care, including narcotic pain medications, from Dr. Griffis. Dr. Griffis and the claimant entered into a “Pain Management Agreement” which provided that the claimant would be honest with the doctor regarding her symptoms, and that she would not share, sell or trade her narcotic medications and that she understood that her narcotic medications would not be replaced if lost or stolen. The claimant later reported to Dr. Griffis that her ex-boyfriend broke into her apartment, sexually assaulted her and stole her medications. The claimant requested that she receive her narcotic prescription early as a result of the theft. Dr. Griffis gave the claimant a prescription for one week on oxycontin, but asked to see some paperwork to document the assault and theft before he decided whether or not to give her an early refill. The claimant did not provide the requested paperwork.
Dr. Griffis told the claimant that he was not willing to continue treating her under these circumstances. Dr. Griffis sent a letter to the claimant stating that she should try to find another physician for further treatment of her chronic pain. Dr. Griffis did not designate a specific physician, and did not refer the claimant to her family physician. Dr. Griffis simply stated that he was no longer willing to treat the claimant due to the violation of the pain management agreement and she was going to have to obtain treatment elsewhere.
Neither the claimant nor Dr. Griffis contacted the insurer regarding the fact that Dr. Griffis had discharged her from care. The claimant at the suggestion of her attorney went to Dr. Hall. Dr. Hall prescribed narcotic pain medications. Later the claimant’s counsel called the insurer and requested that they authorize and pay for the claimant’s treatment with Dr. Hall. The insurer refused and immediately designated Dr. Leppard for the claimant’s authorized medical care.
The record transmitted to us on review does not contain a brief in support of the Petition. Consequently, the effectiveness of our review is limited. Ortiz v. Industrial Commission, 734 P.2d 642 (Colo.App. 1986). The claimant’s Petition to Review states that the ALJ erred in denying the claimant’s request for payment of medical benefits rendered by Dr. Hall. The claimant contends that when an authorized treating physician refers the claimant to her personal physician, respondents do not have the right to intercede and substitute their choice for the claimant’s personal physician. The claimant further argues that the factual findings made by the ALJ do not justify the ALJ’s conclusion.
The claimant’s argument assumes that the claimant’s authorized treating physician referred her to her personal physician. The ALJ specifically found that Dr. Griffis did not refer the claimant to her family physician. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order at 3 ¶ 8. No transcript was ordered and, therefore, we must presume that the ALJ’s factual findings are supported by the record. Nova v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 754 P.2d 800 (Colo.App. 1988). In any event the record transmitted to us does contain a copy of Dr. Griffis letter which fully supports the ALJ’s finding that the claimant was not referred to her family physician. Exhibit D. The deposition transcript of Dr. Griffis also supports the ALJ’s finding. Griffis Depo. at 20.
A physician’s status as “authorized” is generally a question of fact for resolution by the ALJ. See Popke v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 944 P.2d 677 (Colo.App. 1997). Accordingly, we must uphold the ALJ’s findings concerning these questions if supported by substantial evidence in the record. § 8-43-301(8), C.R.S. 2005 As noted above, in this case we must presume that the ALJ’s factual findings are supported by the record, Nova, supra. In any event the record submitted contains abundant support for the ALJ’s findings of fact. Contrary to the claimant’s arguments, the ALJ’s findings of fact that Dr. Griffis did not refer the claimant to Dr. Hall or to her family physician, does justify her determination that the claimant’s request for medical benefits to pay for Dr. Hall’s treatment should be denied.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated February 6, 2006, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
__________________________________ John D. Baird
__________________________________ Thomas Schrant
Diane Selvage, Donna Ortiz, Terrace Gardens Health Care, Colorado Springs, CO, American Home Assurance, c/o Dawn Chambers, AIG Claim Services, Inc., Shawnee Mission, KS, William A. Alexander, Jr., Esq., Colorado Springs, CO, (For Claimant).
Joanne C. Crebassa, Esq., Denver, CO, (For Respondents).