4-321-681 (1998). MISTY MASSEY.

• Case Date: July 10, 1998
• Court: Colorado

Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-321-681 (1998). MISTY MASSEY INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF MISTY MASSEY, Claimant, v. DELUXE/CURRENT INC., Employer, and TRAVELERS INSURANCE, Insurer, Respondents.W. C. No. 4-321-681 FINAL ORDER The claimant seeks review of an order of Administrative Law Judge Wheelock (ALJ) which denied temporary partial disability benefits, medical benefits and a change of physician. We affirm. The ALJ found that on August 15, 1995, the claimant suffered a compensable injury to her right hand due to the repetitive activities required of her job as a customer service representative at Deluxe/Current, Inc. (Current). That injury is the subject of W.C. No. 4-321-681. The respondents admitted liability and provided treatment. On February 20, 1996 Dr. Light placed the claimant at maximum medical improvement (MMI) with no permanent medical impairment. However, due to a non-occupational condition diagnosed as "chronic urticaria," Dr. Light permanently restricted the claimant from performing repetitive activities with her right hand for over four hours a day. The claimant has not requested an independent medical examination (IME) on the issue of MMI. Thereafter, the claimant returned to part-time employment at Current and continued to have problems with her upper extremities. The respondents admitted liability for a new injury on October 3, 1996, in W.C. No. 4-326-180, and referred the claimant to Dr. Bergland for treatment. Dr. Bergland diagnosed "recurrent" right carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). On March 24, 1997, Dr. Bergland placed the claimant at MMI with 10 percent permanent impairment of the right upper extremity and discharged the claimant from further treatment. The claimant applied for a hearing in W.C. No. 4-321-681 on the issues of average weekly wage, medical benefits, temporary partial disability from October 3, 1996 to March 24, 1997, and a change of provider. No additional issues were endorsed by the respondents. The ALJ determined that in the absence of an IME on the issue of MMI she was bound by Dr. Light's opinion that the claimant reached MMI for the 1995 injury on February 20, 1996. Furthermore, the ALJ determined that the claimant's subsequent upper extremity problems are attributable to a new injury occurring on October 3, 1996. Therefore, the ALJ denied...