Opinion
W.C. No. 4-404-884
August 13, 1999.
FINAL ORDER
The respondents seek review of an order of the Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation (Director) ordering them to reinstate temporary disability benefits. The respondents contend that they were entitled to file an admission for a "closed period" of temporary disability benefits without complying with Rule of Procedure IX, 7 Code Colo. Reg. 1101-3 at 32-36.01. We affirm.
The respondents filed a general admission of liability for temporary total disability benefits from January 3, 1999, through January 12, 1999. In the "General Remarks" section of the admission the respondents stated they were admitting liability for a "closed period of wage loss, between the DOI and date of return to school — at which his contract of hire would end."
In an order dated April 27, 1999, the Director ordered the respondents to reinstate temporary disability benefits "until such time as temporary benefits may be properly terminated in accordance with Rule IX, or until hearing is held and further order entered." The Director determined that returning to school does not provide grounds for termination of temporary disability benefits under § 8-42-105(3), C.R.S. 1998. Therefore, the Director concluded the respondents were required to terminate benefits in accordance with Rule IX or obtain an order permitting the termination of benefits.
On review, the respondents contend that Allison v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 916 P.2d 623 (Colo.App. 1995), and § 8-43-203(2)(b)(I), C.R.S. 1998, authorize the filing of admissions for closed periods of temporary disability benefits without regard to the dictates of Rule IX. We disagree.
In Childers v. Noah's Ark Whitewater Rafting, W.C. No. 4-392-209 (April 7, 1999), we held the filing of an admission of liability for a "closed period" of temporary benefits is tantamount to the unilateral termination of admitted benefits, and the statute precludes the unilateral termination of benefits unless the respondents comply with Rule IX. Section 8-43-203(2)(d), C.R.S. 1998; Monfort Transportation v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 942 P.2d 1358 (Colo.App. 1997); Snyder v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 942 P.2d 1337 (Colo.App. 1997); A R Concrete v. Lightner, 759 P.2d 831 (Colo.App. 1988); accord, Valdez v. Estate of S. G. Deacon, W. C. No. 4-398-418 (June 8, 1999), Corrected Order, June 28, 1999. We see no reason to depart from our conclusions in Childers and adopt them as if set forth herein. Further, the Director's order fully and fairly addresses the respondents' arguments and we conclude it is in accordance with applicable law. Consequently, the Director's order must be affirmed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Director's order dated April 27, 1999, is affirmed.
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
_______________________________ David Cain
_______________________________ Robert M. Socolofsky
NOTICE
This Order is final unless an action to modify or vacate the Order is 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 August 13, 1999 the following parties:
Jason Withrow, 2235 Ute Highway, Longmont, CO 80503
Jason Withrow, 26000 Colorado Rd. 114, Rm. 308, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Jason Withrow, 2965 S. Acoma St., Englewood, CO 80110
Delivery by Design, LLC, 1600 W. Evans Ave., Unit J, Englewood, CO 80110
Curt Kriksciun, Esq., Colorado Compensation Insurance Authority — Interagency Mail (For Respondents)
Patricia Smith, Carrier Practices Officer, Division of Workers' Compensation — Interagency Mail
BY: A. Pendroy