W.C. No. 4-420-445Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
February 21, 2001
FINAL ORDER
The pro se claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Mattoon (ALJ) which dismissed his claim based on mental impairment. We affirm.
The ALJ found the claimant was subjected to “poor treatment” by superiors and coworkers. This treatment included “juvenile behavior” such as teasing and poor supervision. However, the ALJ concluded the claim for mental impairment benefits is not compensable because the claimant’s stress did not arise “primarily” from the work environment, but was attributable to preexisting depression. The ALJ further found the conditions to which the claimant was subjected were “unpleasant,” but not generally outside a worker’s usual experience or sufficient to evoke symptoms of distress in a worker in similar circumstances.
The claimant filed a petition to review, but no brief in support of the petition. Consequently, the effectiveness of our review is limited. Further, the claimant failed to request a transcript of the hearing. Consequently, we must assume the ALJ’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Nova v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 754 P.2d 800 (Colo.App. 1988).
The statute currently codified at § 8-41-301 (2) (a), C.R.S. 2000 [formerly section 8-41-301 (2) (b)], requires that the mental impairment which forms the basis of the claim shall have “arisen primarily from the claimant’s then occupation and place of employment.” The courts have interpreted this provision to mean that a claim for mental impairment is not compensable unless the hazards causing the stress are more attributable to the workplace than to the claimant’s personal problems. General Cable Co. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 878 P.2d 118 (Colo.App. 1994); Young v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 860 P.2d 591 (Colo.App. 1993). Here, Dr. Entin’s deposition testimony (which is included in the record) supports the ALJ’s determination the claimant’s stress was primarily attributable to his preexisting depression. Because the ALJ’s finding is supported by substantial evidence in the record, it must be upheld. Section 8-43-301 (8), C.R.S. 2000.
The claimant failed to provide a transcript; therefore, we must also infer the evidence supports the ALJ’s determination that the conditions of the claimant’s employment were not generally outside a worker’s usual experience, nor would the circumstances have caused symptoms of distress in a worker in similar circumstances.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s order dated June 13, 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 February 21, 2001 to the following parties:
David Valdez, 34830 CR 18.4, Trinidad, CO 81082
Tracie Hughes, Colorado Department of Transportation, 4201 E. Arkansas Ave., Denver, CO 80222
Legal Department, Pinnacol Assurance — Interagency Mail
Richard M. Lamphere, Esq., 111 S. Tejon St., #700, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 (For Respondents)
BY: A. Hurtado