W.C. No. 4-730-564.Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
May 12, 2010.
FINAL ORDER
The claimant seeks review of a corrected disfigurement order of Administrative Law Judge Azer (ALJ) dated January 26, 2010 that ordered the insurer to pay the claimant $1,300.00 for disfigurement. We affirm.
The ALJ entered a disfigurement order dated January 8, 2010 that granted the claimant $2,100 for disfigurement. Although the respondents had not appeared at the disfigurement hearing, they filed a motion for reconsideration. In their motion the respondents pointed out that the claimant’s date of injury was March 12, 2007. The provision for disfigurement under the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado found in § 8-424-108 C.R.S, was significantly changed in 2007 for injuries occurring after the April 26, 2007 effective date of the statute. Colo. Sess. Laws 2007, ch. 174 at 640-641(HB 07-1297). For injuries prior to April 26, 2007 the amount for disfigurement compensation could not exceed two thousand dollars.
The ALJ entered a corrected disfigurement order on January 26, 2010. The ALJ in the corrected order noted the date of accident and the maximum amount that might be awarded under § 8-42-108 before HB 07-1297. The ALJ reduced the amount of the award and ordered the respondents to pay the claimant $1,300.00.
The claimant brings this appeal of the corrected order contending he was denied his due process rights because he was not allowed to respond to the respondents’ motion for reconsideration. The claimant argues that the ALJ erred in entering his corrected order because the respondents had waived their right to object to the original disfigurement order by failing to appear at the hearing. The claimant does not argue that,
Page 2
given his date of injury, the applicable maximum amount that might be awarded him for disfigurement compensation is two thousand dollars under § 8-42-108. We are not persuaded to interfere with the ALJ’s corrected order.
It is provided under § 8-43-302 C.R.S. that at any time within thirty days of entry of an order an ALJ may correct any errors caused by mistake or inadvertence. This statute grants an ALJ discretionary authority to correct an order. Crowder v. University of Northern Colorado, W.C. No. 4-101-004 (March 7, 1995) Because the ALJ’s power to issue a corrected order is discretionary, we may not interfere with the ALJ’s judgment unless his determination “exceeds the bounds of reason.” Coates, Reid Waldron v. Vigil, 856 P.2d 850 (Colo. 1993). In applying this standard, it is permissible to consider whether the ALJ’s award is in accordance with applicable law. Coates, Reid Waldron v. Vigil, supra. In our view, the ALJ’s corrected order complies with the applicable limitations for the amount that could be granted for disfigurement in this case. Therefore, we perceive no abuse of discretion in the ALJ’s issuance of a corrected order under § 8-43-302.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the ALJ’s corrected disfigurement order dated January 26, 2010 is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
____________________________________ John D. Baird
____________________________________ Thomas Schrant
Page 3
CASEY BABER, PUEBLO, CO, (Claimant)
PINNACOL ASSURANCE, Attn: HARVEY D FLEWELLING, ESQ., DENVER, CO, (Insurer)
FOGEL, KEATING, WAGNER, POLIDORI SHAFNER, Attn: LAURENCE J FREE, ESQ., DENVER, CO, (For Claimant)
PINNACOL ASSURANCE, Attn: ELIZABETH ANNE SMITH, ESQ., DENVER, CO, (Other Party)
Page 1